Skip to main content

Full text of "Martyrdom in Missouri : a history of religious proscription, the seizure of churches, and the persecution of ministers of the gospel, in the state of Missouri during the late Civil War, and under the "test oath" of the new constitution"

See other formats

5 o • I!' .1. j>^= 










S. W. BOOK & PUB. CO., 510 & 512 WASHINGTON AVE. 







R 1915 L 









Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1S69, by 


In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern 

District of Missouri. 


"We are making history," was the convenient and popular "boast 
of certain politico-religious fanatics during the late civil war, and for 
a few years subsequent to its close. It will not be considered imper- 
tinent, now that the " piping times of peace " have come, and men 
are permitted to look back upon the cooled passions and crystallized 
events of that dreadful period with somewhat of calm philosophy, if 
the fact should be announced that "we are writing history." It is 
one thing to make the history, it is quite another thing to write it. 
If others could afford to "make history," and, then, in popular cant 
and with prurient vanity, boast of it, we can well afford to write it 
up for them. And if our part of the task be fairly, candidly and 
correctly done, they will have little reason to complain if they appear 
before the world and go down to posterity in the light of the history 
they have made, and with their true character brought out by the 
shadows they have thrown forward upon the future. History is valu- 
able, not merely as a catalogue of events and an inventory of things, 
but for the principles involved and the lessons taught. The events 
herein narrated are notorious, the principles involved are vital, and 
the lessons important. 

Missouri will ever be conspicuous in the annals of history as the 
only State in the American Union to inaugurate and authorize a 
formal opposition to Christianit} 7 , as an institution, and legalize the 
persecution of ministers of the gospel, as a class. The fact will not 
be denied, and the history furnishes the saddest, wisest lessons. Minis- 
ters of the gospel have been robbed, arrested, imprisoned, and even 
murdered, for no other cause than that they were ministers of the 
gospel. They have been indicted by grand juries, arrested and im- 
prisoned with common felons, mobbed and put to death for no other 
cause than that of preaching the gospel without taking the " Test 
Oath" of the New Constitution. A pure, unsecular Christianity 


owes much to the moral heroism of the Missouri ministry. The faith 
once delivered unto the saints, the integrity of the Church of Jesus 
Christ, as a kingdom not of this world, the purity of the gospel, the 
divine authority of the ministry, the liberty of conscience, and the 
rightful sovereignty of Christ in his Church, with every principle 
and phase of religious liberty, have been illustrated in the lives and 
sublimely vindicated in the sufferings of the ministers of the gospel 
in Missouri. 

The author fully appreciates the delicacy and difficulty of dealing 
with such recent events and so many living names — events, too, which 
belong to the catalogue of crime, and names that will pass into history 
associated with the persecution and stained with the blood of the 
Lord's annointed. But if the task is difficult and the questions deli- 
cate, the duty i3 no less imperative. It is due alike to the martyrs, 
living and dead, and to the holy cause for which they suffered, that 
their names and deeds be preserved, and that their unswerving fidelity 
and sublime devotion to a principle and a cause, equal to the purest 
heroism of the ancient martyrs, should not be lost to the Church. It 
is one of the gravest responsibilities of the hour, and one of the most 
gracious opportunities of the Church, to preserve the history, vindi- 
cate the faith, maintain the principles and impress the lessons of the 
turbulent past upon the peaceful future, that grace may abound 
through suffering and God may be glorified in his servants. 

A diluted charity says, "Let the dead past bury its dead, 
and let the living present draw the mantle of charity over the 
unfortunate by-gones." This might be well enough if the "dead 
past" did not contain the imperishable genu of a resurrection life that 
speaks to us with authority in the vital principles of yesterday, to- 
day and forever, and tells us, amongst other things, that the chief of 
the Christian virtues — a pure, discriminating charity — has no mantle 
for crime, however Christ-like may be its compassion for the penitent 

Both Federal and State legislation shield those who committed the 
crimes of the war from legal prosecution ; but such enactments pos- 
sess no control over the pen and the press. 

In presenting this work to the public the author is fully conscious 
of its many literary defects. But for all that, he dare not sacrifice the 
facts of history, even to literary excellence. Many subjects possess 


an importance and a grandeur wholly independent of those - 
handle them. 

If. in treating of so many men and such recent events, injustice has 
been done the living or the dead, the author pleads the absence of in- 
tention and claims the benefit of a discriminating charity. 

Both the work and the author will receive the severest criticism — 
perhaps censure — possibly abuse. The first — he would not escape if 
he could ; the second — he could not escape if he would ; the third — 
well — it is no new thing under the sun for those who are set for the 
defense of truth and righteousness to be abused. 

The following prefatory notes, furnished by Dr. M'Anally and 
Bishop Marvin, together with the Introduction by Dr. Summers, w T ill 
not only assure the timid and establish the doubtful, but will be as 
grateful to the Methodist and general public as to the author : 


" In the following pages the reader may find an account of some of 
those horrible outrages perpetrated on Christian ministers in Missouri, 
chiefly because they were Christian men and Christian ministers ; but 
scarce a tenth of all such outrages have been, or likely ever will be, 
placed before the public. They have cast a foul and ineraseable blot 
upon the fame of the State of Missouri, and must consign the im- 
mediate perpetrators to an infamy as lasting and as hateful as that of 
the most cruel persecutors of Christians in gone-by ages. And what 
deepens, blackens and renders more odious the guilt of these things is, 
they were for the greater part done by, or under the sanction of, men 
professing to love and follow the Lord Jesus Christ ; with a claim to, 
and under the pretext of, a purer patriotism and holier Christianity, 
they committed atrocities that would disgrace barbarians and savages. 

"It is well the record of these horrible deeds be preserved, that the 
better portion of the people in this and other States may have some 
knowledge of what was done and suffered here during the dark and 
bloody days, from 1861 to '65. 

"Many of those, directly or indirectly, implicated in these deeds of 
cruelty and shame are now loud and earnest in their entreaties for 
'by-gones to be by-gones.' and profess great grief that anything should 
be said or done 'to keep alive the feelings of the past.' It is not 
strange they should feel thus ; but can they reasonably expect an 


honest and outraged people should continue to cover up such abomina- 
tions, receive those who committed them into respectable society, and 
treat them as though they were innocent, honest, high-minded, Chris- 
tian gentlemen ? That would be strange — passing strange ! No ! 
Truth and righteousness, justice and mercy, alike demand that a faith- 
ful record of all such inhuman outrages be made, extensively circu- 
lated and carefully preserved; that all the perpetrators, instigators 
and abettors be consigned to that infamy they so deservedly earned. 
Of such a record this is the first volume, and it is hoped another, and 
another, and, if need be, yet another, will be forthcoming, until the 
whole matter shall be placed in its true and proper light. 

" Of the manner in which the author has performed his work in 
the pages following I need not speak. Each reader will judge for him- 
self, and each will find something to interest and instruct. The facts 
developed are exceedingly suggestive, and suggestive, too, in regard 
to all the interests of society. 

" The thoughtful reader will naturally inquire as to the cause of, 
and reason for, such things, as well as to their natural and legitimate 
effects, and this may induce an honest, healthful inquiry as to what in- 
fluences should be brought to bear to make men better, and thus pre- 
vent the recurrence of such things as are here detailed. Let the book 
be extensively circulated, carefully read, and its contents well con- 


" Carondelet, Mo., December 29, 1869." 

"St. Louis, December 24, 1869. 
"Rev. "W. M. Leetwich: 

" Dear Sh — I have seen the proof sheets of a large portion of the 
first volume of 'Martyrdom in Missouri,' now soon to come from 
the press. 

"The publication of this book meets my hearty approval. I have 
met with some who say, ' Let the past sleep ; let all its crimes, and the 
bad blood engendered by them, be buried forever.' I have not so 
learned Christ. He, the Incarnate Love, charged the blood of the 
prophets upon the sons of their murderers. The true work of Chris- 
tian charity is to eradicate crime, not to ignore it. The maudlin 
sentiment that would daub over the great public crimes committed by 


the highest dignitaries of the Nothern Methodist Church and their 
representatives in the South and along the border, is not charity. It 
is at best a clumsy counterfeit of that chief of the virtues. True 
charity will seek to bring them to confession and recantation of their 

" To all their former misdeeds they now add, to avoid the shame of 
the past, denials, equivocation and, as in the case of the Holston prop- 
erty seized by them, false recriminations. The sober truth is that 
they never hesitated during the time of our public trouble to use the 
influence an active partisanship gave them with the party in power, 
to take possesion of our property, either by military order, or terrorism, 
or mob violence. The public conscience of that Church seems to 
have been debauched by their efforts to defraud us of our property at 
the time of the division of the Church. 

"But the stench of these recent atrocities is so strong in the nostrils 
of the people that the perpetrators resort to the ever open refuge of 
the evil-doer — denial. This book is opportune. The great body of 
the preachers and members of the Church North are honest men. 
The denials made by their leading men and Church papers they sup- 
pose to be true. Here are facts in detail, with places, names, dates, 
and copies of legal proceedings taken from official sources. 

" Before the war, when Northern preachers were objects of suspicion, 
and public demonstrations were sometimes made against them, the 
editor of the St. Louis Christian Advocate, Bev. D. B. M' Anally, 
raised his voice against all mobs and mob violence with a will and an 
emphasis that left no covert suggestions of encouragement to those 
who might have been disposed to resort to violent measures. Led by 
the Advocate, the whole Southern Church in the State gave its in- 
fluence, publicly and privately, against all violent proceedings. If 
that paper and our Church had, at that time, pursued the course that 
the Northern preachers and papers did towards us during the war, 
they would have been driven from the State. As it was, in order to 
get credit for persecution, they had to resort to the most remarkable 
tricks. Take, for instance, the case, given with proper names in this 
book, of one of their camp meetings being broken up by the preacher 
in charge of it being caught in the act of adultery — broken up by their 
own members. This they published to the world as a case of per- 
secution by Southern people. 


"While I do not agree fully with all the views set forth in the pre- 
liminary chapters of this volume, I am prepared to say that the facts 
bearing on the main topic have been collected and verified with great 
care, and that there can be no doubt of the accuracy of the statements. 
You have been pleased to hold 3'ourself responsible, giving proper 
names, dates, etc. I do not hesitate to invite upon myself a full share 
of the responsibility. 

"Hoping that you will soon have the second volume, containing 
the names of our other murdered brethren, read} 7 for the press, 

" I am, very respectfully, 




REV. T. 0. SUMMERS, D. D. 

The author of the following work has desired 
an expression of onr opinion in regard to its pub- 
lication. We have read the manuscript with 
painful interest, and are free to say that we have 
had some misgivings as to the expediency of 
sending it forth to the world. The facts here 
brought to light are so revolting, and their record 
is so damaging to the reputation of those by whom 
they were perpetrated and their aiders and abet- 
tors, that we might well hesitate as to the pro- 
priety of their publication. As Methodists, in 
particular, we are strongly tempted to throw the 
veil of oblivion over those scenes of oppression 
and outrage, in which many of onr co-religion- 
ists of the ISTorth bore so conspicuous a part. 

But the cause of truth and righteousness de- 
mands the publication. There is a measure of 
retribution which must not be relegated to the 
"judgment to come," but which must be dealt out 
in the present world. 

We owe it to " the noble army of martyrs," 
whose lives were sacrificed to appease the demands 
of fanaticism, bigotry, cruelty, and hate, that their 


murderers shall not go unwrapped of justice — at 
least, such, castigation as the truth of history can 

We owe it to those who were made widows and 
orphans by the monsters who enacted these bloody 
scenes, to let the world know that the husbands 
and fathers of these innocent sufferers were not 
rebels and traitors, but good men and true, " of 
whom the world was not worthy." 

We owe it to the institutions of our country to 
let it be known that the appalling scenes that were 
enacted during the late reign of terror were not 
the result of the principles which underlie our 
Federal and State governments, but of the pal- 
pable contravention of them. 

We owe it to the ecclesiastical bodies of the 
South that posterity shall be told who invaded their 
rights ; who robbed them of their churches, parson- 
ages, cemeteries, and seminaries ; who murdered, 
scourged, and plundered, and banished many of 
their ministers and lay members, including even 
women and children, because they would not com- 
promise principles which they held dearer than 
life itself. 

It is well for the world to be told that moral 
heroism has not, like Astrsea, left the earth and 
ascended to the skies. Thank God ! there have 
been heroes in our times ; and we are encouraged 
to believe that the race will not soon become 
extinct. The night of persecution would bring 
such stars to view again. Daniel and the " three 
children," the Maccabees, the Apostles, Polycarp, 


Ignatius, and otlier victims of Pagan persecution 
in primitive times — the Albigenses, Waldenses, 
Huguenots, the Marian martyrs, and other victims 
of papal persecution — Noncomformist and Eemon- 
strant confessors, who "took joyfully," or at least 
patiently, " the spoiling of their goods," imprison- 
ment, exile, and sometimes death — these have had 
their successors in the fearful times through which 
we have passed, and the record of them gives us 
a guaranty that under similar circumstances such 
heroes will appear again. 

In perusing this work one is constantly reminded 
of the saying of the wise man, "Is there any 
thing whereof it may "be said, See, this is new ? it 
hath been already of old time which was before 
us." He had seen similar evils to those which we 
have seen and suffered. " There is an evil which I 
have seen under the sun as an error which pro- 
ceedeth from the ruler : folly is set in great dig- 
nity, and the rich sit in low place. I have seen 
servants upon horses, and princes walking as 
servants upon the earth." " So I returned and 
considered all the oppressions that are done under 
the sun ; and behold the tears of such as were 
oppressed, and they had no comforter." Then, as 
in our late calamitous times, good men mourned 
as they were forced to 

bear the whips and scorns of time, 

Th' oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, 
The insolence of office, and the spurns 
That patient merit of th' unworthy takes. 

The history of these terrible transactions is 
valuable, too, as an admonitory lesson, teaching us 


tliat no sect is absolutely proof against the seduc- 
tive influence of political power and ascendency. 
Down to the present decade the Methodists could 
plume themselves with an honest satisfaction 
upon the fact that while nearly all other sects had 
risen to power and abused it to persecuting pur- 
poses, they never had. It was, indeed, sometimes 
insinuated that they never had persecuted because 
they never had the power to do so. But they 
contended, and, it was thought, with good reason, 
that the principles of Methodism, being so pure, 
spiritual, and catholic, would be a sure safeguard 
from political alliances, worldly ambitions, and 
persecuting practices ; but, alas ! that ground of 
boasting is taken away. The devil came with his 
" third temptation " to Northern Methodists, in- 
cluding even bishops of the Church, and they did 
not say, " Get thee hence, Satan !" They ascended 
by the devil's ladder to " thrones of power," and 
played such tricks during the continuance of their 
brief authority as made the angels weep ! The 
wrongs of 1844 and 1848 developed into horrible 
atrocities in the sun of political prosperity which 
shone upon them during the war which subju- 
gated the South. The lesson, we repeat, is ad- 
monitory. We trust in God no such temptation 
will ever be set before the Southern Church ; it 
seems to be " a test for human frailty too severe." 
It is not intended by these remarks to inculpate 
all the ministers and members of the Northern 
Methodist Church. God forbid ! There are thou- 
sands among them who have not bowed the knee 


to Baal. They are attached to tlie Northern con- 
nection because of their location — they denounce 
the evil deeds of their brethren ; indeed, in many 
instances they are not apprised of them, or 
honestly believe that they are gross exaggerations. 
These enormities, however, are, to a great ex- 
tent, charged upon the Northern Methodist Con- 
nection because, they were perpetrated by its 
bishops and other agents ; endorsed, or at least not 
disowned, by General and Annual Conferences, 
and have not been repented of until this day. 
Need any one seek further for a reason why the 
Southern Church wants no fellowship with those 
who murder, rob, oppress, and slander its ministers 
and members, or sanction those who do ? 

It must not be supposed that we lay all the 
blame upon Northern Methodists — other Churches 
furnished their quota of persecution and oppres- 
sion, though, for obvious reasons, Southern Me- 
thodists suffered more from their Northern co-reli- 
gionists than from any other parties. Thus was 
it with pagan and popish persecutions — a man's 
foes were frequently those of his own household. 
Apostates have ever been the most bitter and 
unscrupulous persecutors. This is a painful re- 
flection. The eagle is pierced by an arrow 
feathered from an eagle's wing ! Thus history 
repeats itself. 

The perusal of this work will teach us not to 
put our trust in man, not even in princes ; no, nor 
in institutions of our own framing, Avritten consti- 
tutions, compacts, and the like, which upon occa- 


sion may prove to be worth no more than the 
parchment on which they are engrossed. 

Nothing is perfectly true, and just, and good, 
and stable, but the kingdom of God. Never- 
theless, the recital of the horrors portrayed in 
this hook, which contains a mere modicum of 
what might be narrated, ought to lead us to thank 
God most devoutly that these calamities are nearly 
overpast, and we have the prospect of civil and 
religious liberty, which we know better than ever 
how to appreciate. The changes which have taken 
place in the government of the United States lead 
many to entertain gloomy anxieties for the future, 
and to despair of the permanency of republican 
institutions ; yet we venture to hope that a wise, 
gracious, and powerful Providence will so inter- 
pose in behalf of our country that these fore- 
bodings will not be realized. 

We may just state that we are assured of the 
truth of many of the details in this work by other 
testimonies ; and for the rest we depend confidently 
on the accuracy of the author, who has taken 
great pains in collecting his materials from the 
most trustworthy sources. He is a reputable min- 
ister of the Missouri Conference of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church, South, and holds himself res- 
ponsible for all that he narrates. 

T. S. 

Nashville, Tenn., Nov. n, 1869. 




Religious Liberty Secured to every Citizen by the Constitution of the 
United States, by every State Constitution, and every Department 
of the Federal and State Governments — Religious Liberty Pro- 
tected and Enjoyed for two Centuries — Tbe Stephen Girard "Will 
Case — Mr. Webster's Great Speech — Religious Rights Defined — 
General Assembly of Missouri Refuses to elect a Chaplain — 
Legalizes Sunday Beer Gardens — A Card — A Renegade Minister — 



Foreigners — Know-Nothingism — Foreign Element in Politics — Class 
Legislation to Encourage Immigration, Develop the Resources, 
and Subvert the Religious Institutions of the State — German 
Rationalists and Christianity — The True Interests of a State — 
Modern Spiritualism — Its Pretensions — Phenomena — Influence 
upon the Credulous — " Circles " — Mediums — Agents — Lecturers — 
Free-Loveism — Thousands of Disciples — Midnight Lamp in 
Thousands of Houses — Many Turned from the Faith to Serve 
Tables — Most Dangerous and Powerful Form of Infidelity — Free- 
Thinkers — A Novel Encounter with an "Improved Monkey" — 
Napoleon's " Moral Combinations " at "Work upon the Public 



All Nationalities and all Social Peculiarities Fused into a Common 
Mass — Missourian — First Settlers of the State — Where From and 
their Type of Domestic and Social Life — The "Kansas-Nebraska 
Bill " — Its Effect upon the Population of Missouri — "Emigration 
Aid Societies " — Extremes Brought Together in Missouri — Reflex 
Tides of Population — Rapid Increase — -Unique Social Formation 
— Social Peculiarities Fuse — Religious Characteristics Become 
more Distinct — Religious Thought and Feeling — Doctrines and 


Dogmas are Sharply Defined and Fearfully Distinct in Missouri — 
Sects and their Peculiarities — Sectarian Strife Uncompromising — 
Why — Religious Controversy — Published Debates — Their Effect 
— Sectarian Bigotry and Intolerance — Differences, Essential and 
Non-essential — History Ever Repeating ttself — Persecution lias 
Adopted Few New Expedients — Early Martyrs and the Missouri 
Martyrs — "The Altar, the Wood and the Lamb for a Burnt 



Slavery only the Occasion — Action of the General Conference in 1836 
—Slavery in the Church in 1796 and in 1886 — N<> Change of its 
Moral Aspects in L844 — Facts Perverted — Constitutional Powers 
of the Church — Bishop Andrew a Scapegoat — Protesl of the South- 
ern Conferences— Resolution and Plan of Separation — Dr. Elliott 
and Schism — The Vote — The Question in the South — Louisville 
Convention in 1 S4"> — Division — The Bishops oi the M. E. Church 
Accept the Division the following July — Failure to Change the 
Sixth Restrictive Rule — General Conference of L848 Pronounce 
the Whole Proceedings Null and Void— Dr. Lovick Pierce Re- 
jected—Fraternization Denied — Responsibility of Non-Fraterniza- 
tion — Northern Church Refuse to Make any Division of Property 
— Appeal to the Civil Courts — Decision ^{' the United States 
Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York — Justice 

McLean — United States Circuit Court for the Southern District 

of Ohio — Judge Leavitt's Decision — Supreme Court of the United 
States — Points Decided— The Decision of the Supreme Court in 





Provision of the. Plan of Separation — Line of Division — The 
Missouri r Border Conference — Vote on Adhering North or 
South nearly Unanimous — The Disaffected — Covenant Breakers 
— The M. E. Church in Missouri after the Division— Her Minis- 
ters and Members — Eow Regarded — Relative Strength of the 
Two Churches in Numbers and Property — Sympathy — Perse- 
cution — Tenacity in Spite of Opposition — Success the only Revenge 
—The Class of Northern Methodist Preachers— Their Connection 
with Clandestine Efforts to Free the Slaves— Their Condemnation 
and their Secret Service — Character ^i' the old Missourians — 
Their Vindication — Northern Methodists Condemned for being 
Secret Political Partisans, and not for Preaching the Gospel— The 
Anti-Shivery Elemenl in Missouri Ten Years before the War — 
Lawful vs. Clandestine Menus — "Underground Railroad" and 
other Nefarious Schemes to Run off the Slaves of Missouri— These 
Things Condemned by the Anti-Slavery Party — Public Meetings 
of Citizens in the Interest of Order and Peace. 


From 1845 to 1861, Continued. 

Responsibility of Ministers, Editors and Publishers — Perversion of 
Facts, a Double Guilt — Public Meetings — Presses Mobbed — Fabius 
Township Meeting in 1854 — Rev. Mr. Sellers — Review of the Pre- 
amble and Resolutions — Meeting at Rochester, Andrew County — 
Three Facts Affirmed of these Meetings — The Best Citizens Con- 
trolled Them — What the Author of the Fabius Township Resolu- 
tions Says — Jackson Seminary in Cape Girardeau County — The 
Jefferson City Land Company and the Great Northern Methodist 
University — The Transaction Transparent — Resolution of Missouri 
Conference of 1858 — A. Bewlev — The True Facts in his Case — 
That he was Hanged at Fort Worth, Texas, not for being a Minister 
of the Gospel, but for Complicity in the most Horrible Crimes — 
The Facts Analvzed — The Bailey Letter — Bishop Morris — Dr. 
Elliott— Truth is "Mighty— Correct* View of the Relation of the M. 
E. Church to the People of Missouri prior to the War. 



Conflict of Sentiment — Party Spirit — New England and Missouri 
Fanatics — Fraternal Blood — " Houses Divided — Three against Two 
and Two against Three " — Organized Armies and Predatory Brig- 
ands — Bull Run, Seven Pines, The Wilderness, Gettysburg and 
Vicksburg Reproduced on a small scale in every County and Cross 
Roads in Missouri — War upon Non-Combatants — The Bloodiest 
Records — Ministers of the Gospel — Their Troubles and Perplex- 
ities — Peculiar Trials and Persecutions — Military Fetters put upon 
the Conscience — Dismal Prayers and Military Orders. 



Border Slave State — Missouri State Convention — The Last Hope — 
Virginia Convention — Missouri would not Secede — Rights in the 
Union — Disappointment — Anomalous Position — Governor Jackson 
and General Price— Great Excitement — Ministers Embarrassed — 
One False Step Fatal— The Sword vs. Sympathy — W T hy the Inno- 
cent and Helpless Suffered more in Missouri than Elsewhere — 
Constructive Sympathy — Predatory Bands — Hon. Luther J. Glenn 
Commissioner from Georgia — The Effect of the Fall of Fort 
Sumter and President Lincoln's Proclamation — The State Officers, 
Legislature and Militia Adhere South — Assemble at Neosho, Pass 
an Act of Secession, Elect Delegates to the Confederate Congress, 
etc., etc. — Preparations for War — Union vs. Price's Army — State 
Convention Meets Again — Its Acts and Doings— Two State Gov- 
ernments — Sympathy, Property and Plunder — Ministers Again — 


Their Course — Days of Fasting and Prayer — Conferences — Meet- 
ing in St. Charles — Resolutions — Prudence and Prayer — The Press 
— Anti-Christ Abroad — Central Christian Advocate and a few 
Facts — Rev. Mr. Gardner — "Men and Brethren Help"— State 
Convention again in October — The First Oath for Ministers. 



Ministers of Peace — Course Pursued by the St. Louis Christian Advo- 
cate — Rev. Dr. M' Anally its Editor — Candid, Truthful. Honest — 
The Cause of its Suppression, and the Imprisonment of the Editor 
— Ministers of the M. E. Church, South, Labor and Pray Earnestly 
for Peace — Days of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer— Ministers 
who became Political Partisans had no use for such days — " Breath- 
ing out Threatening and Slaughter" — Spirit of the Northern 
Methodist Press — False Publications for a Purpose — One Mr. John 
Stearns and the Wtstern Advocate — daring Falsehoods — Excite- 
ment in St. Louis and Throughout the State — Persecution of Min- 
isters in Kansas and Reign of Terror along the Border — Rev. W. 
H. Mobly and Rev. John Monroe in Southwest Missouri — Sys- 
tematic Efforts to Break up the M. E. Church. South, and Dis- 
perse her Ministers — Editorial in St. Louis Advocate — The Cen- 
tral Again — Impressions Abroad — Baptists and Presbyterians 
Implicated — " Religion in Missouri " — Missouri Conference at 
Glasgow — St. Louis Conference at Arrow Rock and Waverly — 
Conference Stampeded by the Rumor of a Gunboat — Author 



Indiscriminate Robbery, Pillage, Arson and Murder — Banditti and 
Revenge — Black-Mail and Espionage — Panic, Depopulation and 
Plunder — Demoralization — Virtue Sacrificed — Some who Would 
not Bow the Knee to Moloch — God had an Altar and Israel a 
Priest — Persecution, Arrest and Imprisonment of Revs. J. Ditzler, 
J. B. H. Wooldridge and D. J. Marquis — Many others Suffered 
in Like Manner — Rev. James Fewel Arrested, Cruelly Treated, 
and Died from the Effects of Inhuman Treatment, aged Seventy- 
two Years — Many such Victims — The True Office and Work of 
the Ministry — Its Spirit and Mission — Any Departure Unsettles 
the Public Mind — A Sad Day for the Country, Church and State 
— Relations and Dependencies — Three Thousand and Fifty New 
England Clergymen Before Congress — A Solemn Protest and its 
Effects — Then and Now — Ecclesiastical Bodies on the "State of 
the Country" — Ecclesiastical Bummers — A Settled Policy to 
Drive the Old Ministers out of the State — General Halleck'3 




Church Property — Can the War Revive or Create Titles — Church 
Property on the Border — Maysville, Kentucky — Legal Rights of 
Property — Attainder — Honest Inquiry — Eighth Commandment — 
The Truth of History — Church in Kansas City — North Methodists 
— Faithful Ladies — What was Said at the Time — Some who wore 
with us Went out from us — Their loss our gain — Church in Inde- 
pendence — How they Got it and Why they Kept it — The 
Former Pastor — Why he left — Battle of "independence — "Black 
Thursday " — A Rev. James Lee — How he got Possession of the 
Church — Rev. Mr. DeMott — How he got Possession of the Par- 
sonage — A Poor Widow Turned Out by Military Order — Strategy 
— Rev. M. M. Pugh Demands the Property — Why Refused — Re- 
course to the Civil Courts — Statement of the Case by Counsel — 
Side Scenes — Extracts from the St. Louis Advocate — This Pro- 

£erty in the Statistics of Northern Methodism — Action of the 
[issouri and Arkansas Conferences, M. E. Church, on the Subject 
— Reflections. 



Church at Lexington — Suit Brought for it by the Methodist Church 
— Statement of Mr. Sawyer — Suit Dismissed — Salem, Arrow Rock, 
California and other Churches — Lagrange Church History — How 
the Church North Borrowed and then Seized it — Notice Served — 
Colonel W. M. Redding the "Faithful Guardian "—Rev, W. C. 
Stewart— Christian Charity— What a Southern Methodist Says— 
Central Advocate — Mr. Stewart's "Honor" Transmitted — Suit for 
Possession — Arbitration — Louisiana Church — Its History and how 
it was Seized — Civil Courts and Church Trustees — Names Forged 
— Counter Petition — Decision of Court of Common Pleas — 
Supreme Court of Missouri — History of the Case — Opinion of the 
Supreme Court — S. S. Allen, Esq., on Church and State — Rulings 
of the Court — The Case Reversed — Efforts to Compromise — Five 
Years' Possession — Reported in Church Statistics — Supplement — 
Able Argument of Smith S. Allen, Esq. 



Church in Boonville — One of the Oldest Religious Centers — Rev. J. 
N. Pierce and his Exploits — " An Honest Looker On " in the St. 
Louis Christian Advocate — Circuit Court vs. County Court and J. 
N. Pierce— Supreme Court— Howard et al. vs. Pierce— Report 


and Opinion— Circuit Court Sustained — John N. Pierce et al. Ex- 
hibited in no Enviable Light — Legal History of the Case — Decision 
— Points to be Noted— -Moral Travestie — Judgment of Posterity — 
Church in Springfield — How Obtained — How Long Used — How 
Released — Particulars Reported by a Committee of the St. Louis 
Conference — Church in Potosi — Statement of W. S. "Woodard — 
Plattsburg, Fillmore, Macon, Glasgow and other Churches — 
Strange Assertion — Statistical Value of Churches Seized over 
$100,000— How Restored— Property Rights Secured to the M. E. 
Church, South — Great Moral Courage or "Hard Cheek" — "Mak- 
ing History" — Martyrdom of Principle. 



War Claims of Northern Methodists Settled by Ecclesiastical Black- 
Mail — Military Mitres and Episcopal Shoulder-Straps — The Differ- 
ence—The " Stanton- Ames Order " — " The Great Episcopal Raid " 
— "Special Order, No. 15," from Major General Ranks — Official 
Board of Carondelet Street Church, New Orleans, and Bishop 
Ames — Episcopal Power Then and Ecclesiastical Criticism Now — 
Popular Verdict — Abandoned (?) and Embarrassed Churches and 
Ecclesiastical "Bummers" — Church Extension in the South — 
Letters and Extracts — Bishop Clark and " Church Extension Meet- 
ings" — Does the End Justify the Means, or Success Satisfy the 
Demands of Modern Ethics? — Property Acquired by the M. E. 
Church in the South in a few Years — Four Hundred and Eight 
Churches. Eighteen Parsonages and Eight Literary Institutions in 
two Years. Worth $446,659 00, all in Five Conferences — Opinions 
of their Leading Men and Journals — Hon. John Hogan, of St. 
Louis, Scuttles the Episcopal Ram — Order from the War Depart- 
ment, with President Lincoln's Endorsement — Possible Deception 
— Rev. Dr. Keener, of New Orleans, Sues for the Churches of 
Louisiana four Months — McKendree Church, Nashville, Vacated, 
"by Order from Bishop Simpson" — Memorial of the Holston 
Conference M. E. Church, South, to the Chicago General Confer- 
ence, and How it was Treated — Action of Chicago General Con- 
ference — "Stanton- Ames Order" Duplicated for the Baptists — 
Conclusion — Sensible Warning from the St. Louis Anzeiger. 



Philosophy of Martyrdom t— Living Martyrs — Names Made Im- 
mortal" by Persecution — Martyrs of Missouri — Difference 
Between Martyrs for the Testimony of Jesus, only Questions 
of Time and Place — The Spirit the Same Everywhere — Causes 
— Explanatory Remarks — Rev. Ja?nes M. Proctor Arrested 


Coming out of the Pulpit — Connection with the M. E. Church, 
South, his only Offense — Kept in Prison for Weeks, then Released 
— Rev. Marcus Jirrington — Chaplain — Insulted — Kept in Alton 
Prison — Rev. John McGloth'in — Petty Persecution and Tyranny 
— Rev. James Penn — Meeting Broken Up — Driven from His own 
Chui'ches by a Northern Methodist Preacher Leading an Armed 
Mob — Persecution — Prayer. 



Ministers of other Churches in the Fellowship of Suffering and on the 
Rolls of Martyrdom — Rev. Wm. Cleaveland Arrested for Preach- 
ing in a Rebel Camp — Imprisoned and Insulted — Made to Pray for 
Mr. Lincoln on a Loyal Cannon — Rev. Captain Cox, a Northern 
Methodist Preacher, his Persecutor — Other Indignities — Indicted, 
Arrested and Arraigned as a Common Felon for Preaching without 
taking the ''Test Oath" — Rev. Jesse Bird Arrested, Silenced and 
Banished — Losses, Exposure and Hardships of his Family — Re- 
turns — Arrested and put in Jail for Preaching without taking the 
" Test Oath "—Public Indignation— The Most Virulent Persecu- 
tors Subsequently Elevated to the Highest Civil Offices. 



Elder James Duval — His Own Statement — Endorsement — Minister 
of the Regular Baptist Church — Arrested at Midnight — Suffered 
Much — Passes and Rermits — Assessment for Military Purposes — 
Arrest of Elder G. W. Stout — Elder Duval again Arrested — Sent 
to Chillicothe — Charge, Trial and Acquittal — Making History — 
Re-arrested at New Garden — Heavy Bond — In Court for not Tak- 
ing the Oath — Met others in the Same Condemnation— Isaac Odell 
and Allen Sisk under Indictment with Elder Duval — Estebb, the 
Prosecuting Attorney — Dunn & Garver for the Defense — Baptist 
Church at New Garden — Trial of their Pastor, Elder Isaac Odell, 
for not taking the Oath — Acquitted -The Convicted — Division of 
the Church — Troubles — Non-Fellowship. 



Exceptional Distinction — Revs. J. B. H. Wooldrige, D. J. Marquis 
and Geo. N. Johnson Arrested, Abused and Imprisoned for Asso- 
ciating Together — Rev. M. M. Pugh Arrested and Imprisoned — 
Arrested Three Times— Indicted — Northern Methodists Implicated 
in his Persecutions — Flags over Pulpits by Military Orders — Efforts 
to Force the Consciences of Ministers — A Caustic Note — "Der 


Union Vlag on Der Secesh Church" — A Minister's Wife Ordered 
to Make a Shroud for a Dead Union Soldier — Keen Retort — An 
Old Minister in a Rebel Camp — How he '""Went Dead" and 
"Saved his Bacon" and Potatoes — Rev. J. M. Breeding — Armed 
Men Visit him at Midnight — Order him to Leave the Country in 
Six Days because he was a Southern Methodist Preacher — Arrested 
at Church by Lieutenant Combs— A Parley — Men said if They 
were not Permitted to Shoot They would Egg Him — Waylaid by 
Soldiers to Assassinate Him — Providential Escape — Waylaid the 
Second Time, and Providential Escape — Move to Macon Count}' — 
Further Troubles — Reflections. 



Rev. R. N. T. Holliday — Statement of his Persecutions Furnished 
by Dr. Richmond, a Federal Officer — Could not War upon the 
Institutions of Heaven — Mr. Hollidav aloof from Politics — Mis- 
construed — General Wm. P. Hall and his Militia Proclamation — 
General Hall and Mr. Holliday — General Bassett — Rev. Wm. 
Toole, Provost Marshal, and Mr. Holliday — A Renegade — Platte 
City Burned by Jennison and Mr. H. Ordered to be Snot on Sight 
— He Escapes — Is Arrested in Clinton County — Again Ordered to 
be Shot — Escapes to Illinois — Returns in 1865 — Goes to Shelbyville 
and is Indicted for Preaching Without Taking the Oath — Crimes 
of the War — Common Law Maxim Reversed — Prominent Minis- 
ters of the M. E. Church, South, Assumed to be Guilty of Treason 
— Murder of Rev. Green Woods — Birth, Early Ministry and Gen- 
eral Character — Gives up his District — Retires to his Farm in Dent 
County — Affecting Account of his Murder given by his Daughter 
— Extract from a Letter Written by his Wire — Details Published 
in the St. Louis Advocate of June 13, 1866 — Reflections. 



Rev. A. Monroe, the Patriarch of Missouri Methodism— Age,Honor and 
Sanctity not Exempt from Profanation — Mr. Monroe and his Wife 
Arrested in Fayette— Mrs. Monroe's Trials and Witty Retorts — How 
Mr. Monroe Escaped the Bond — Robbed of Everything by Kansas 
Soldiers in 1864— An Old Man Without his Mittens— A Tower of 
Strength — "Our Moses " — Calls the Palmyra Convention — Rev. W. 
M. Rash — The Character of Missouri Preachers — A Native 
Missourian — Settles in Chillicothe — In St. Joseph the First Year of 
the War — Caution in Public Worship— An Offensive Prayer by 
Rev. W. C. Toole — General Loan Closes the Church and Deposes 
Mr. Rush from the Ministry by Military Order — General W. P. 
Hall vs. Mr. Rush— Hall Publishes a Letter that Denies Mr. Rush 
Protection, and Exposes him to Assassination — Mr. Rush Returns 
to Chillicothe — His House a Stable and his Home a Desolation — 
Bold Attempt to Assassinate him — Correspondence with General 


Hall— Goes to St. Louis — Masonic Endorsement — In Charge of the 
Mound Church — Will Hear of Him Again — Rev. Nathaniel Wol- 
lard Murdered in Dallas County — Horrihle Details — Particulars — 



His Character and Position as a Minister — Order of Banishment — 
Interview with General Merrill — Note to Colonel Kettle — Cause 
of Banishment — Letter to A. T. Stewart — Provost Marshall at 
Danville — Frank, Manly Reply — Second Letter to Mr. Stewart. 
and Petition to General McKean — The Latter Treated with Silent 
Contempt — Strong Loyal Petition Endorsed hy H. S. Lane, U. S. 
Senator, and O. P. Morton, Governor of Indiana — "Red Tape" — 
Petition Returned — Hon. S. C. "Wilson Counsel for the Exiles — 
General Schofield Finally and Unconditionally Revokes the Order 
of Banishment — Indictment for Preaching Without Taking the 
"Test Oath." 



Rev. D. B. Coopei — Attempt Made to Ride him on a Rail — Defeated 
bv the Timelv Appearance of Soldiers — Particulars Furnished by 
Dr. N. W. Harris— Rev. H. N. Watts— A Native of Missouri- 
Efforts Made to Place the Old Ministers under Disability or Run 
them out of the State — Mr. Watts Arrested — Silenced — Corre- 
spondence with Provost Marshals Ried and Sanderson— "Test 
Oath" — Rev. Thos. Olanville — An Englishman by Birth — Early 
Life — Peculiar Trials — Manner of Life as a Citizen and a Minister 
— Driven from Home in 1863 — Returns and Obtains Written Per- 
mission to Preach — Warned not to fill his Appointment on Sab- 
bath, September 20, 1863 — Remains at Home — That Night he is 
Shot Through his Window — Shot a Second and Third Time, and 
Expires Praying for his Murderers — His Eldest Son Shot and 
Killed the Same Night — Details Furnished by J. H. Ross and Rev. 
John Monroe — Conclusion. 



Missouri Distinguished for Religious Persecution — Religious Liberty 
Secured to every Citizen by the Constitution of the United States, 
by every State Constitution, and every Department of the Federal 
and State Governments — Religious Liberty Protected and Enjoyed 
for two Centuries — The Stephen Girard Will Case — Mr. Webster's 
Great Speech — Religious Rights Defined — General Assembly of 
Missouri Refuses to elect a Chaplain — Legalizes Sunday Beer 
Gardens — A Card — A Renegade Minister — Reflections. 

The State of Missouri is justly entitled to the distinc- 
tion of being the first and only State in the American 
Union to inaugurate and authorize a formal opposition 
to Christianity, as an institution, and to legalize a 
systematic proscription and persecution of ministers of 
the gospel, as a class. Her constitution, statute books 
and judicial proceedings alone reproduce the ordi- 
nances, enactments and decisions of the " dark ages," 
without the papal superstitions and priestly conscience. 
Her prison walls and dungeons dark have revived the 
horrors of Spain without the Inquisition, and her civil 
and military officers, her courts and mobs, have re- 
enacted the cruel tyranny and the religious intolerance 
of Austria, with the papal " concordat " left out. 

Her fertile soil has been stained with the blood of 
real martyrs, and the " seed of the church ;; has been 


scattered all over her broad prairies and along her 
winding streams. Unmarked graves and marble monu- 
ments here and there fix the eye of God as he watches 
the dust of his martyred servants awaiting the resur- 
rection, and a double portion of his Spirit is given to 
the living watchman in answer to the brother's blood 
that cries from the ground. 

The Spirit of the Divine Master, in whose service 
they fell, inspires charity for the living, and will not 
rebuke the tears that fall for the dead. We have both, 
and it is profitable to indulge them, while we accord to 
Missouri the distinction she has justly won in reviving 
the laws and repeating the religious persecutions which 
an enlightened Christianity vainly hoped had passed 
away with the barbarous times which produced them. 

The right to worship God without molestation, ac- 
cording to the dictates of conscience, was not only 
secured by the Federal and State Constitutions, but was 
always sacredly preserved and defended by the three 
co-ordinate branches of the Federal Government, and 
by the executive, judicial and legislative departments 
of the several State governments, until it had become 
so thoroughly interwoven with every form and feature, 
every principle and fiber of our institutions, and had 
penetrated so deeply and permeated so generally the 
popular heart, that its defenses were considered im- 
pregnable and its sacredness inviolable. 

Every attempt to abridge the religious liberties in- 
volved in the rights of conscience, from whatever 
quarter and under whatever disguise, has been met 
and resisted by a public sentiment that pronounced it 
the most dangerous and unwarranted invasion of the 


dearest rights of American citizens. The enactment 
of laws to restrain the liberties of the citizen in any- 
other direction might be tolerated, but whenever and 
wherever the enactment of laws, the decision of courts 
or the exercise of power have infringed upon the rights 
of conscience, or placed religious institutions under dis- 
ability, the American people have moved to a resistance 
that subordinated all minor differences and distinctions 
and put their hearts and lives, their all, upon the 

The strenuous efforts made to break the will of 
Stephen Girard, in the courts of Pennsylvania, in 1839 
and '41, and in the Supreme Court of the United States 
in 1844, are too fresh in the minds of American jurists 
and many of the American people to require more 
than a reference to one single item in this connection 
as an illustration. 

The founding of the institution in the citv of Phila- 
delphia that bears the name of Girard, and his princely 
bequest for that purpose, would have passed his name 
down to the generations to come as one of the great 
benefactors of his race, but for one restrictive clause in 
his will; and it was in the light of that clause that the 
case assumed a national importance, and enlisted some 
of the ablest advocates of the American bar, prominent 
amongst whom was Mr. Webster. 

After providing for all the college buildings that 
would be necessary, and the enclosure of the grounds 
by high stone walls, with iron gates for ingress and 
egress, he adds the following restrictions : 

"Secondly — I enjoin and require that no ecclesiastic, 
missionary or minister of any sect whatever shall 


ever hold or exercise any station or duty whatever in 
the said college, nor shall any such person ever be ad- 
mitted for any purpose, or as a visitor, within the 
premises appropriated to the purposes of said college." 

Mr. Girard had a right to dispose of his estate in any 
way that his wisdom might direct, provided, however, 
the rights of others were duly respected; and Mr. 
Webster's unanswerable argument clearly sets forth the 
relations of Christianity to the State, and shows that 
such disabilities are in direct conflict with the institu- 
tions of the country, against the public policy of Penn- 
sylvania, and every other State in which Christianity 
is recognized as the law of the land, and must be sub- 
versive of the dearest rights and liberties of the people. 

What is the value of Mr. Girard' s bequest, however 
great or munificent, when it touches the very founda- 
tions of human society — when it touches the foundations 
of religious liberty, of jmblic law, and endangers the 
well-being of the State ? 

The restrictive provisions of Mr. Girard's will, in the 
opinion of Mr. Webster, distinctly repelled Christianity 
in the person of its accredited ministers; for what- 
ever proscribes the minister of Christianity proscribes 
Christianity itself. The ministry is a part of Chris- 
tianity, divinely instituted and authorized, and whoever 
makes war upon ministers of the gospel, as a class, 
makes war upon the Christianity they teach and rep- 

In the light of these facts the State of Missouri, by 
her military and civil officers, her conventions, her 
General Assembly and her courts, has fairly won the 


unenviable distinction here announced, the painful 
history of which is recorded in these pages. 

The ground work of this persecution was laid in the 
public mind years before its manifestation. The first 
out-croppings of the anti-Christian spirit was in the 
session of the General Assembly of 1858-9, in declining 
to elect a Chaplain, and in the refusal to repeal what 
was called the "Sunday Law." The encouragement 
given to this infidel spirit by a large portion of the 
press of the State, and by many so-called benevolent 
associations of foreigners, and from other influential 
sources hereafter noticed, prepared the public mind for 
the legislation, the military and civil despotism, and the 
mob-violence which authorized and executed a system 
of persecution, the history of which presents a cata- 
logue of crime and scenes of blood and murder dis- 
graceful to the State and revolting to the whole civilized 

The refusal of the General Assembly to elect a chap- 
lain, December, 1858, derives its importance, not from 
the fact, but the animus of the debates, and the senti- 
ment reflected by the action. 

The journal of the House of Representatives, of Dec. 
29th, 1858, contains the following : 

"Evening Session. — Mr. King, of St. Charles, offered 
the following resolution : Resolved, That the House do 
now proceed to the election of chaplain. Mr, Edwards, 
of Dallas, offered the following amendment to the reso- 
lution : 'And that the individual members of this House 
pay said chaplain for his services out of their private 
means;' which, on motion of Mr. Sitton, was tabled by 
a vote of 79 to 43. 


"Dec. 30th, 1858. — The House resumed the consider- 
ation of the regular order of business, viz., the election 
of chaplain, when Mr. King, of St. Charles, nominated 
Mr. Leftwich; Mr. Brisco, of Cass, nominated Mr. 
"Williams; Mr. Boulware, of CallaAvay, nominated Mr. 
McG-uire ; Mr. Lenox, of Miller, nominated Mr. Lit- 
singer; Mr. Davis, of Buchanan, nominated Mr. Welch. 
Mr. Anient moved to reconsider the vote on the adop- 
tion of the resolution to proceed to the election of 
chaplain, pending which motion Mr. Morris, of Barton, 
nominated Mr. Crow. Mr. "Welch moved to lay the 
motion to reconsider on the table, which was negatived 
by a vote of 49 to 69. 

"Afternoon Session. — Mr. Ament offered the follow- 
ing resolution as a substitute for the resolution of Mr. 
King, of St. Charles, in regard to the election of chap- 
lain for the House : ' Besolved, That the speaker be 
authorized to invite, each alternate week, the services 
of the respective resident ministers of this city, in open- 
ing, daily, this House with prayer.'" 

This resolution awakened a lively discussion, which 
consumed much of the time of the three succeeding 
days — at a cost to the tax-payers of the State of not less 
than $20,000 — and was finally passed under the opera- 
tion of the previous question. Several efforts were 
made afterward to reconsider, but to no effect. The 
Senate, after some discussion, adopted a similar resolu- 

The debate upon this resolution was very spirited, 
and drew out the sentiments of the people's representa- 
tives quite fully. Party lines were drawn clearly 
between the chaplain men and the anti-chaplain men, 


and this resolution was considered by both parties a 
compromise upon the vexed question. But why com- 
promise such a question ? Why make it a vexed 
question at all ? Former Legislatures had elected chap- 
lains and paid them, and thus recognized Christianity, 
not only as an element of national character, but as an 
accepted institution of'the State, the doctrines of which 
were confessed in the oath of office and in all judicial 
tribunals, and the institutions of which conserve the 
highest interests of public weal, as they appeal to the 
most sacred guardianship of the State. 

If the position taken by Mr. "Webster, in his great 
speech before the Supreme Court of • the United States, 
in the Grirard will case, is accepted as true — and it is so 
accepted by all the right-thinking men of the country — 
there is nothing in the New Testament more clearly 
established by the Author of Christianity than the ap- 
pointment of a Christian ministry; that the ministry is 
a necessary part of Christianity, divinely ordained for 
its propagation, and whoever rejects the regularly 
authorized minister of the gospel rejects the Christianity 
he teaches and represents ; whatever repels the ministry 
repels Christianity, for it is idle, and a mockery and an 
insult to common sense, to pretend that any man has 
respect for the Christian religion who yet derides, re- 
proaches and stigmatizes all its ministers and teachers. 

The action of the House of Representatives was 
spread upon the journal, but the animus of the members 
could only be gathered from the speeches, and then 
only by one who was present to hear and see. The kiss 
of betrayal precedes crucifixion. 

It was in view of the spirit developed by this action, 


more than the action itself, that three of the resident 
ministers of the city held a council, and after due de- 
liberation published the following card in the city 
papers : 


" We, the undersigned, resident ministers of this city, 
believing that the discussion just closed in both branches 
of the General Assembly, on the office of chaplain, is a 
virtual repudiation of the claims of Christianity by that 
body; and that the action had is only a compromise 
measure, designed to reconcile the hostility of members 
somewhat to that office ; and believing that for us to 
comply with any request to officiate in that capacity, 
under existing circumstances, will compromise the dig- 
nity of our office and the gospel which Ave preach; 

"Resolved, That we will not sacrifice our self-respect 
and ministerial dignity to the enemies of Christianity 
by officiating in the office of chaplain for either branch 
of the General Assembly. 

(Signed) "W. M. Leftwich, 

Pastor M. E. Church, South. 

Pastor Prestn'terian Church. 
"B. H. Weller, 

Kector Episcopal Church. 
"Jefferson City, Mo., Dec. 31, 1858." 

It is due alike to Christian integrity, ministerial 
fidelity and the truth of history to state that Bev. Mr. 
Lougheed did subsequently officiate as chaplain to the 
Senate, upon the solicitation of one or two members of 
that body, and under the .operation of the unrescinded 


action of December 31st, 1858, after he had solemnly 
affirmed and formally announced to the world, through 
the public prints, that to do so would "compromise 
his self-respect and ministerial dignity." 

This same session of the Legislature was made famous 
by the failure to repeal what was known as the " Sun- 
day Law/' which was passed merely upon its title, and 
in disguise, by the previous session, and which legalized 
the opening of beer gardens, play-houses, and many 
other places of drunken licentiousness on the Christian 
Sabbath in St. Louis. Pending the effort to repeal this 
unchristian law the discussions in both Houses and in 
the public press assumed an importance and a gravity 
which greatly alarmed the Christian people of the State 
for the freedom and safety of all religious institutions, 
and awakened the faithful watchmen upon the walls to 
the real issues that the enemies of Christianity would 
make, and to the real danger that threatened the peace 
and well-being of society in the not distant future. 



Political Excitement of 1859 and '60 — Foreigners — Know-Nothingism 
— Foreign Element in Politics — Class Legislation to Encourage 
Immigration, Develop the Kesources, and Subvert the Religious 
Institutions of the State — G-erman Rationalists and Christianity — 
The True Interests of a State — Modern Spiritualism — Its Preten- 
sions — Phenomena — Influence upon the Credulous — Circles — 
Mediums — Agents — Lecturers — Free-Loveism — Thousands of Dis- 
ciples — Midnight Lamp in Thousands of Houses — Many Turned 
from the Faith to Serve Tattle- — Most Dangerous and Powerful 
Form of Infidelity — Free-Thinkers — A Novel Encounter with an 
'"Improved Monkey" — Napoleon"> ''Moral Combinations" at 
Work upon the Public Mind. 

Many will remember with unfeigned regret the 
political excitement that began to agitate the whole 
country in 1859, and which increased in violence and 
intensity the nearer the Presidential election of 1860 
was approached. 

In times of great popular excitement, when partisans 
are using their utmost efforts to carry elections, it is 
less surprising than hurtful that politicians should ap- 
peal for support to every class of citizens. The German 
population of St. Louis, St. Charles, Franklin, Cole, 
and some other counties and cities had increased rapidly 
in the past few years, and now for the first time began 
to make their presence and power felt in Missouri 
politics. They had fairly recovered from the effects of 
Know-Nothingism, if, indeed, the existence and labors 
of that singular political freak did not precipitate the 
foreign born citizens into a distinct political element 
and foist them into political prominence. 


Being courted, and flattered, and fawned upon by 
political place-seekers, they were easily induced to be- 
lieve that they held the balance of power at the ballot- 
box in many of the largest cities of the State, and they 
began to claim the right, not only to vote, but to be 
represented as a distinct class in the city and State 
governments — to hold office and control municipal 

To secure the support of this class of citizens poli- 
ticians stood ready to enact special laws for their relief, 
to grant privileges and immunities to them as a class, 
and to accommodate their social peculiarities and re- 
ligious castes and creeds. The statutes of the State and 
the ordinances of cities show that they were the privi- 
leged class, and that class legislation, which always 
endangers the well-being of society, was accommodated 
in this instance to those peculiarities of the foreign 
element which looked to the subversion of the Chris- 
tian institutions of the State, and the protection of an 
infidel sentiment that dared to invade the sanctity of 
the Christian Sabbath, disturb the peace of Christian 
worshipers, and strike down the supreme authority of 
•the Word of God as a code of morals and a system of 

To encourage foreign immigration for the develop- 
ment of the resources of the State, to build railroads, 
open coal beds, work lead mines and melt iron moun- 
tains, special legislation may have been necessary, but 
a State consists of something other than broad, fertile 
acres for agricultural purposes, or coal beds, lead mines, 
iron mountains and railroads. 

These may be fruitful sources of material wealth, and 


may be necessary to support and sustain a vast popula- 
tion, but they can not create intelligence, promote 
virtue, regulate the social system, or in any way define 
and adjust the higher duties and prerogatives of citi- 

The wisest legislation protects equally the rights of 
all and confers exclusive privileges upon none, and the 
best government guarantees equal rights to all its citi- 

It is natural to expect that foreigners coming to these 
shores and settling in these States would accept the 
institutions with the protection of the government, and 
not seek to supplant the institutions of the State that 
offers them home and shelter ; and yet it will not be 
denied that the foreigners in Missouri, taking advantage 
of the readiness of politicians to truckle to their passions 
and prejudices, have made strong demands upon the 
peculiar institutions of the State, and their demands 
have not been unheeded. It could not be expected that 
G-erman rationalists, who could scarcely speak English 
well enough to carry on the most ordinary traffic, would 
understand, or care to understand, those institutions of 
the State which characterized the State as a Christian 

Nor did legislators, politicians, editors or preachers 
consider the moral forces they were starting and foster- 
ing for evil, and the subtle agencies that would work 
with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that 
perish, and whose coming was after the manner of 
Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, 
deceiving the very elect, and spending its force and 


fury upon the desecrated altars and martyred ministers 
of Christianity. 

Other and different agencies were at work, and had 
been for years, which could not be reached or affected 
by State legislation, and which contributed no little to 
that state of the public mind which put the institutions 
and ministers of Christianity under disability — what 
was commonly denominated "Spiritualism." It existed 
in a multitude of forms, had many names, and mani- 
fested itself in many strange phenomena. Professing 
to hold communication with the spirit world and re- 
ceive intelligence from departed spirits, it appealed 
strongly to the curious, the credulous and the super- 

Those who believed in the supernatural, or whose 
hearts of grief kept them near the "region and shadow 
of death," or whose caste of temperament made them 
supersentimental, or who, by some constitutional or 
cultivated peculiarity, easily take up with every wild 
fancy and foolish vagary that produces a new and novel 
sensation ; and many others, too, who had credit for 
intelligence, refinement and piety — and as for that, some 
of the most gifted minds of the State — were led away 
by it, and became its deceived disciples, in one form 
or another, without suspecting its deceitful moral 

Lecturers came into the cities and traversed the State, 
circles were formed, mediums constituted, spirits rapped 
and wrote, tables moved and turned, and men, women 
and children forgot their meals, and stood in super- 
stitious awe within the enchanted circles. Thousands 
of people lost their relish for the Word of God and for- 


sook his altars of worship. Men neglected their fields, 
women their homes and children their schools, and for 
whole days and nights hung with bated breath upon the 
supposed communications from departed spirits, made 
often through the most ignorant mediums. Not only 
in the cities full, but throughout the vast populations 
of the rural districts, all classes seemed more or less 
affected by and interested in it. In thousands of homes 
in Missouri the midnight lamp shone upon tables sur- 
rounded by groups and circles of people so intent upon 
the unintelligible incantations and messages of spiritual- 
ism, so-called, that sleep was banished from swollen 
eyes and pillows brought no rest to aching heads. By 
it many were disqualified alike for secular, domestic 
and religious duties. 

A peculiarity of spiritualism was that night and dark- 
ness were necessary to evoke the spirits. They would 
rarely communicate to mortals in the day time, or per- 
form any very remarkable feats, such as playing on 
musical instruments, untying mediums, singing in the 
air, etc., except in total darkness. Evil spirits, like evil 
men, "love darkness rather than light, because their 
deeds are evil." 

This modern spiritualism — neither the history nor 
philosophy of which it is necessary here to discuss — 
organized itself into bands, circles and societies of men 
and women in the larger cities, had their places of 
secret nocturnal meetings, rented halls for public Sab- 
bath exercises, had their rituals and creeds, their priests 
and prophets, their altars, incantations and genuflexions, 
which answered to some sort of public worship. The 
first female lecturers and public speakers were spiritual- 


ists, and in the spiritualists' church, so-called, women 
are the high-priests j and the scriptural teachings in re- 
gard to the relation of men and women and their duties 
in the church are reversed. 

Indeed, to call them a church at all is a misnomer, 
and a shameful reflection upon every idea, principle and 
function of a true church of Jesus Christ, for by be- 
lieving in a revelation direct from departed spirits in 
the spirit world they reject God's revelation. 

They commissioned mediums to write, women and 
men indiscriminately to preach, to heal the sick, to see 
through the material and reveal the spiritual, to break 
up the marriage relation, to destroy parental affection, 
to form new standards of private and social virtue, to 
disturb and destroy all the old foundations and safe- 
guards of society, and reconstruct the social system 
upon the modern ideas of socialism and the most offen- 
sive forms of free-loveism. 

Eeligious liberty with them meant social licentious- 
ness, and the social virtues were sacrificed to the lustful 

These things can not all be affirmed of all spiritualists, 
and yet the inevitable tendency is the same, and the 
extremest consequences are legitimate. To say that 
thousands of people in Missouri, through the subtle 
agencies of spiritualism, renounced their religion, for- 
sook the church, neglected to read God's Word, turned 
themselves away from paths of piety and works of 
righteousness to serve tables, and became downright 
infidels, is not half of the whole truth. To a large ex- 
tent the minds of men became detached from the foun- 


dations of Divine truth, and wandered, like the " unclean 
spirit, seeking rest and finding none." 

Systems of infidelity, and infidelity without system, 
sprang up in every direction and found supporters 
amongst those that were least suspected, and the church 
began to tremble for the "faith which was once de- 
livered unto the saints." Free-thinking, so-called, took 
the place of solid, religious faith, and every form of 
doctrine received encouragement m the public mind. 
The tendency in the public mind to skepticism was 
never more alarming, and the mystic vagaries of Andrew 
Jackson Davis stood in defiant competition with the 
New Testament. Lecturers appeared in every city and 
centre of population, haranguing the people upon the 
vain philosophies of men and questions of science, falsely 
so-called, seeking to turn away their ears from the 
truth unto fables, and " doting about questions and 
strifes of words " that would and did disturb the foun- 
dations of godliness. Nor could both the religious press 
and pulpit countervail their influence upon the public 
mind. Infidel clubs and associations were formed under 
different disguises, and many mischief-makers began to 
believe and teach " unwholesome doctrines" and de- 
ceive the ignorant and unwary. It was a common thing 
to hear of men lecturing in the principal towns on 
spiritualism, a higher civilization, phrenology, patho- 
logy, physiology, hygiene, and other kindred topics, 
and selling maps, charts and cheap books. In some 
places they drove a brisk trade, and set. all the old 
women — and young ones, too — men and boys to talking 
and querying over the new ideas and theories advanced 
by these flippant, and often immodest lecturers. 


The character of such teachings can not better be 
illustrated than by relating a somewhat novel adventure 
which the author had in the spring of 1859 with one of 
these lecturers. 

While stationed in Jefferson City I was invited by 
the Moniteau County Bible Society to deliver a lecture 
in California on the Bible cause, and aid them in rais- 
ing funds to supply the destitute of the county with the 
"Word of G-od. Arriving in California by the afternoon 
train I was informod that a gentleman, a stranger, had 
been there lecturing for several evenings, and would 
lecture again that evening, in a public hall. My in- 
formants had not heard him, and could not tell exactly 
his subject or his object. When informed that his 
lectures were free, and that he was selling some kind 
of books, I was not long at a loss to reckon his moral 
latitude and longitude, and, indeed, to "guess" whence 
he came, and what he came for, and hoped that some 
lucky chance would throw us together. 

The meeting of the Bible Society that night was 
quite a success, but my anxiety to see the lecturer 
seemed fated to disappointment. The next morning, 
in company with a friend, I went to the hotel, near the 
depot, to await the arrival of the down train. A goodly 
number of gentlemen sat and stood about in the public 
room awaiting the train also. My friend soon opened 
the way (as he knew many of them) for an appeal to 
them for contributions to the Bible cause, to which they 
pretty generally declined to respond. About this time 
a rather queer looking genius entered the hotel from 
the street, hastily and boisterously relieving himself at 
once of what seemed to be a meal sack half filled with 


books, and several rather pert exclamations and gen- 
eral salutations, taking a seat near me. I did not at 
first suspect his identity, but his inveterate loquacity 
brought him into notice, and my eye soon measured a 
small, thin-visaged, sharp-nosed, squint-eyed, thin-lipped, 
cadaverous, nervous specimen of humanity, a stranger 
to every sense of modesty, propriety and decency, and 
who believed that with himself all wisdom would die. 
He soon learned that I lived in Jefferson City, and the 
following conversation occurred. Turning to me, whom 
he had evidently been regarding for some time with 
uncivil curiosity, he said : 

" You live in Jefferson City ? " 

"Yes, sir." 

" On your way home now ? " 

"Yes, sir." 

"Will you be good enough to make an announce- 
ment for me to lecture in your city next week ? " 

"Well, I don't know. Our people are not good 

" Why, don't you think I can have a good house ? " 

" That depends upon circumstances." 

"What circumstances? My object is to do good." 

"What subject do you propose to lecture on?" I 

"Yarious subjects; but especially treating of the con- 
struction and functions of the human body, the laws of 
physiology and hygiene." 

"You may possibly do some good by lecturing on 
such subjects," said I, "and as we both are trying to do 
good, but in different ways, possibly if you will help 
me I may be able to help you." 


By this time, of course, we had the eager attention 
of all present. 

"How can I help you?" he inquired. 

"I am trying/' I replied, "to raise money to supply 
the destitute of this county with the Bible, and as I 
have applied to all of these gentlemen for help, perhaps 
you would give me something." 

"No, indeed," said he, with emphasis, "I would 
rather give my money to have all the Bibles in the 
county burned up." 

"You don't believe much in the Bible, then ?" 

"Not a bit of it," he replied. "It has deceived the 
people long enough already. If the people would only 
read my books on physiology and hygiene, and learn 
something of the nature and laws of their own physical 
organization, and what will promote the health, growth 
and action of all its parts, and let that ' old fable' alone, 
they would be healthier, happier and better off every 

He said this with an air of assurance and authority 
which he evidently thought and desired would settle 
the matter with me, at least for the present, as he rose 
and walked the room nervously. 

But I had seen too many men in the West to be 
bluffed off after that style, and my interest in him was 
too intense. 

" Well, my friend," I said, after he subsided a little, 
" If you do not believe the Bible, what do you believe V 

" I am a free-thinker, sir." 

" And what is a free-thinker ? " 

" One who thinks freely, and as he pleases, upon all 
subjects, without the shackles and 'leading strings' of 


the Bible, or any other old book — who has the inde- 
pendence and manliness to think for himself. " 

" I have long desired to see a free-thinker/' said I, 
rather coolly. 

"Look at me, then, and you will see one/' he replied, 
rather curtly. 

"Will you be kind enough," I asked, "to tell me 
what you think, ' freely/ upon some subjects of grave 
importance of which the Bible treats?" 

"What subjects?" 

"The origin of man, for instance. If you reject 
revelation, how do you account for the origin of our 
race ? " 

" Easy enough," he replied. " In the same way that 
I account for the origin of plants and animals — by 
growth and development." 

" You believe, then, in what is called the ' develop- 
ment theory ? ' " 

"I do, most fully and freely." 

" From what is man a development ? " I asked. 

" From the lower animals, and immediately from the 
animals whose organism is nearest like ours." 

"What animal," I asked, "do you think furnishes 
the resemblance so striking that leads you to believe 
that man is a development from it, and an improve- 
ment on it ? " 

With evident embarrassment, he answered, " I sup- 
pose the ape or the monkey." 

" Then," said I, "I think I can have you a fine audi- 
ence in Jefferson City next week, if I can make the 
announcement according to your theory." 

" How is that ? " he inquired. 


"I will tell the people that an improved monkey will 
lecture to them." 

The excitement of the man was scarcely less than 
the evident pleasure of the listeners. 

" And, moreover/' I continued, "I will readily excuse 
you for not giving me anything for the Bible cause, 
and can no longer be surprised that you desire to see 
all the Bibles destroyed." 

"Why?" he asked, turning upon me sharply. 

"Because," said I, "J can not expect a monkey, how- 
ever developed and improved, to appreciate a revela- 
tion from God." 

He became furious, sprang to his feet, and with 
gesticulations as rapid and violent as the volubility of 
his tongue, and as threatening as the intensity of the 
mingled chagrin and anger that burned in his coun- 
tenance, delivered himself somewhat as follows : 

" You are a Methodist preacher, going about trying 
to make the people believe that they can get religion — 
that God can convert them. It is all a deception — a 
delusion. God can do no such thing. I was deceived 
once, too, and was fool enough to join the Methodist 
church and believe that God could convert me. I went 
to the mourners' bench, where you try to get people to 
go ; they sang, and prayed and shouted over me, and 
beat me on the back, and tried to make me believe that 
I was converted. But it was no such thing. God 
could not convert me. How could he get into me ? 
Where would he come in at ? At the mouth ? or nose ? 
or ears ? All the men in the world could not make me 
believe that I could be converted. God 'lmighty could 
not convert me." 


He closed, pretty well exhausted, and yet with his 
feelings somewhat in the ascendant, and with marked 
interest awaited my reply. 

" I am not at all astonished at the fact/' said I, u that 
God could not convert you." 

" Why ? Do you not teach the people that God can 
convert and save men ? " 

" Certainly I do. But, then, I read in the Scriptures 
no provision whatever for the conversion and salvation 
of monkeys, however improved*." 

Without another word he wheeled and " went away 
in a rage/' snatching up his sack of books in his flight, 
and muttering something that could not be heard above 
the roar of laughter that followed him. I never saw 
him afterward. From that moment he went his way, 
and I mine. Our paths never crossed each other, or 
at least we never met. Our' encounter lasted about 
half an hour, and when he disappeared so unceremon- 
iously nearly every gentleman present walked up and 
gave me a dollar for the Bible cause, as the best way 
of testifying their appreciation of the victory. 

This aptly illustrates the pernicious character of the 
teachings then rife through the State, and this " im- 
proved monkey " was a fair specimen of the class of 
itinerant lecturers that were then talking to thousands 
upon thousands of the people every week. 

The rejection of the office of chaplain by the State 
Legislature, and the passage of the " Sunday law," and 
other class legislation affecting the religious institu- 
tions of the State, meant more than the temporary 
freak of a few irreligious politicians. It was the ex- 
pression of a wide-spread and growing sentiment 


amongst the people, and the first bold demand of a fast- 
maturing infidelity. 

The great Napoleon said that "there are certain 
moral combinations always necessary to produce revo- 
lution ; and if they do not exist it is impossible to 
revolutionize a government or interrupt its peaceful 
administration. Without them a few ambitious lead- 
ers, inspired by selfish motives, may struggle in vain 
for political power. " 

If civil revolutions attest the wisdom of this remark 
of the great military chieftain, much more the moral 
and religious phases which revolutions assume under 
given conditions. 

The foreign element, with its rationalism, anti-Sabba- 
tarianism and abused Romanism ; the irreligious ele- 
ment, with its Spiritualism, Universalism, Free-lovism 
and open and disguised infidelity — these furnish to the 
reflecting " moral combinations " sufficient to produce, 
or at least to control and direct, the great moral 
agencies that were so efficient during the civil revolu- 
lion in burning churches, breaking up religious associa- 
tions, hunting down and dragging ministers of the 
gospel " to prison and to death," and adding to the 
horrors of civil war, this, that the comforting ministra- 
tions of Christianity are proscribed, or altogether pro- 
hibited, under the penalty of imprisonment or death, 
or both imprisonment and death, to the man of God 
whose enlightened conscience teaches him to fear God 
rather than man. 



Characteristics of the Population — All Nationalities and all Social 
Peculiarities Fused into a Common Mass — Missourian — First 
Settlers of the State — Where From, and their Tj r pe of Domestic 
and Social Life — The "Kansas-Nebraska Bill" — Its Effect upon 
the Population of Missouri — " Emigration Aid Societies " — Ex- 
tremes Brought Together in Missouri — Keflex Tides of Population 
— Rapid Increase — -Unique Social Formation — Social Peculiarities 
Fuse — Religious Characteristics Become more Distinct — Religious 
Thought and Feeling, Doctrines and Dogmas, Sharply Denned 
and Fearfully Distinct in Missouri — Sects and their Peculiarities — 
Sectarian Strife Uncompromising — Why — Religious Controversy 
— Published Debates — Their Effect — Sectarian Bigotry and Intol- 
erance — Differences, Essential and Non-essential— History Repeat- 
ing Itself — Persecution the Same in Every Age — Early Martyrs 
and the Missouri Martyrs — " The Altar, the Wood and the Lamb 
for a Burnt Offering." 

The population of Missouri differs in some respects 
from that of any other State. There is a greater variety 
of nationalities blended, of blood mingled, and of 
national, political, social, domestic and religious charac- 
teristics crossed and intermixed than can be found in 
any other State. 

Other States may have more nationalities represented 
in their population, and the political, social and eccle- 
siastical characteristics may be more sharply denned ; 
but that fact only confirms the position taken — that in 
Missouri these characteristics lose their identity, to a 
greater or less extent, and become fused in the common 
mass. Nearly all the nationalities of Europe, and many 
of Asia, are represented in Missouri, but only a few 
years' residence is sufficient to either destroy or modify 
their national characteristics. 


The social and domestic peculiarities of every State 
in the Union, with many foreign states, are exotics here; 
while many of them die out altogether and are aban- 
doned, others compromise and intermingle, until the 
type of social and domestic life is somewhat of a hybrid, 
and is peculiarly Missourian. 

The bulk of the old population of the State was from 
Kentucky, Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, Ten- 
nessee and Ohio, with a respectable number from 
Indiana, Illinois and New York. Up to 1855 and '56 
the types of social life existing in these several States 
w T ere scarcely disturbed in Missouri. After the passage 
by Congress of the somewhat notorious "Kansas- 
Nebraska bill," in 1854, and the organization of these 
Territories, the population of Missouri increased rapidly 
and became of a more general character. 

" Emigration aid societies" in New England and the 
Eastern States threw into these newly-formed Terri- 
tories thousands of families who represented in their 
social and religious lives the extreme of New England 
ideas and New England faith. 

Emigration from the Southern Atlantic and Gulf 
States, whether by aid societies or otherwise, rushed to 
these Territories, bringing the extremest types of 
Southern life. The middle and Mississippi Valley 
States furnished their share, until the swelling popula- 
tion of Kansas presented a scene of contrasts and con- 
flicts turbulent and exciting beyond anything before 
known in the history of territorial settlement. 

It is true that it was the struggle of political parties 
for dominion, each seeking to incorporate its peculiar 
class of ideas and cast of policy into the corporate 


structure of the future State by controlling the Terri- 
torial election; yet the effect upon the social and do- 
mestic peculiarities of Missouri, as well as the peculiar 
institutions of the State, was marked and decided. 

Missouri caught the reflex tide of population, and her 
fertile soil, mineral wealth and commercial advantages 
not only retained this reflex population, but supplied 
an effective appeal to thousands more from all parts of 
the country — North, East and South — until for a few 
years her population increased at the rate of nearly one 
hundred thousand per annum. And yet, in her extended 
area of territory, this immense influx was scarcely 
perceptible. Along her rivers and railroad lines her 
population thickened, and her great commercial centres 
felt the life and power of multiplied agencies and re- 

Either the rapid growth of cities, the stir and excite- 
ment of trade, the strife for fortune and fame, the 
magical charm of Western life, or something else pecu- 
liar to the climate, the country or the people, all of these 
distinct and opposing types of social life began soon to 
lose their "type force" and blend into a conglomerate 
social mass, with fewer Northern, Eastern and Southern 
peculiarities than Western — a rather unique social for- 
mation, which the modern socialogists have not yet 

Few Southern men and Southern families long re- 
tained their purely Southern style of life, and few 
Eastern or Northern men and families long retained the 
social and domestic habits that were peculiar to the 
latitude from which they hailed. It is easy to see how 
the social life that derives its characteristics from such 


different and distant systems would be peculiar in itself 
and to itself. 

People lose their social characteristics much sooner 
and more easily than they do their religious peculiari- 
ties. The former are based on education, taste, associa- 
tion and habit, the latter on principles vital and divine. 
As every national and social characteristic known to 
American society has become mixed and blended in 
Missouri, so every shade of religious thought and feeling, 
every form of religious doctrine and dogma, together 
with every type of ecclesiasticism known to modern 
American civilization, exists in the hearts and homes 
of Missouri — at least to some extent. Nearly every 
shade of religious belief has a representative in Mis- 
souri, and stands out more or less distinct upon the 
moral phases of society. 

These do not blend. No moral alchemist can fuse 
the distinct religious peculiarities of a people. Men 
may relinquish their social and domestic characteristics 
because they are matters of taste or convenience ; but 
to give up their distinctive religious characteristics is 
considered a sacrifice of principle and conscience. 

Men do not struggle long to maintain and propagate 
that which was peculiar to their former social life, but 
will contend foreveV for that which is peculiarly dis- 
tinctive in their religious belief. That which men hold 
lightly and esteem of little value to them elsewhere 
assumes an importance and a value in the West, and 
will not be surrendered tamely. Religious ideas which 
in Massachusetts and South Carolina existed in the mind 
crudely or loosely, exerting no influence upon the life, 
would in Missouri take a permanent shape, seek aflini- 


ties, and ultimately grow into churches struggling for a 
place in the great moral agencies of the State. Men 
whose religious habits were scarcely formed, and whose 
lives had not assumed any positive ecclesiastical type 
in the older States, on coming to Missouri became posi- 
tive, decided, unequivocal, sectarian partisans, and 
often uncharitable bigots. Men who would contend 
fairly for their distinctive tenets elsewhere contend 
fiercely here, and very few live long in this State with- 
out espousing, to some extent, the cause of some 
religious sect. 

There are causes for this state of things. Society is, 
to a great extent, in a formative state. In very few 
places, if any, has society settled down into grooves, 
and channels, and circles, and social and church castes, 
as in the older States; and then society exists in a great 
variety of unassimilated elements, Northern, Southern, 
Eastern, Western; English, French, German, Scotch, 
Irish, with a hundred different shades of social and 
domestic life, which are too distinct to become homo- 
geneous, and which seek in church creeds and church 
associations their social as well as religious affinities. 

The result is that, perhaps, no other State can furnish 
as great a variety of distinct sects, or denominations of 
Christians, with the religious population so liberally dis- 
tributed amongst them. There may be more sects in 
States that have a much larger population, but in pro- 
portion to the population, no State has a greater variety 
of churches which accommodate such a diversity of 
belief, each of which has so large a hold upon the 
public mind. 

It would, indeed, be anomalous if all of these sects 


could exist together in peace. Missouri can not claim 
such exceptional distinction. In, perhaps, no State op 
country has denominational contention and strife been 
more general and uncompromising. 

Not willing to accept the standards of doctrine pub- 
lished and recognized by each church, nor to abide by 
the verdict of learned debates upon all questions of 
difference, ministers and members, with astonishing 
freedom and with defiant presumption, enter the arena 
of controversy, public and private, with a zeal and a 
spirit equally hurtful to Christian charity and the gen- 
eral cause of true piety. Nothing can awaken a com- 
munity more generally and excite the people more 
intensely than a public debate, formally arranged and 
pitched by two noted champions. The notoriety 
gained by the ant agonist ce outlasts, if it does not out- 
reach, the settlement of disputed questions. And, 
then, each man or woman, however old or young, must 
become an adept in religious controversy, and convert 
every road side, street corner, shop, office, counting 
room, kitchen and parlor into a place for petty, spite- 
ful theological disputation. Instead of edifying one 
another in love, and deepening the work of grace in 
the heart by appropriate religious conversations, they 
embitter the sectarian spirit, destroy Christian charity, 
alienate personal friendship, " and dote about questions 
and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, rail- 
ings, evil surmisings, perverse disputing of men of 
corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth. " 

With many, sectarian jealousy is equaled only by sec- 
tarian bigotry, and the great work of soul-saving is 
made only tributary to denominational success. Indeed, 


many go so far as to deny the virtue of saving grace to 
all but themselves, and vainly imagine that the saving 
virtues of the atonement are transmitted to the hearts 
of men only through their church ministrations and 
distinctive ordinances. 

Nothing excites sectarian jealousy more thoroughly 
than great religious awakenings and revivals in any 
given church. It is natural that the minister of the 
gospel who, as a human instrument, is very successful 
in winning souls to Christ should be "highly esteemed 
in love for his work's sake/' and yet nothing exposes 
him more to the unjust criticisms and unchristian de- 
tractions of his less successful brethren in the ministry. 
Let a revivalist be successful in stirring the religious 
life of a whole community and in producing a general 
religious awakening, and the ministers and members of 
other churches, instead of joining heartily with him in 
the great work and laboring together for the general 
good, will watch with jealous interest the progress 
of the work, discuss with uncharitable criticism its 
character, and seize the first opportunity to begin 
a meeting of their own, that they may make the 
religious awakening of the community inure to their 
denominational advantage. Should the revival occur in 
a small town where the whole population Christianized 
could not more than adequately support one healthy 
church organization, with one pastor, instead of as- 
similating all the religious elements, it would act like 
a moral solvent, disparting and isolating each shade of 
religious belief and thought. " Where two or three 
are gathered together" of the same belief they will 
organize, send for a pastor and set up for themselves. 


Thus the little community becomes divided into little 
sectarian factions, each to drag out a half-conscious, 
miserable, contentious existence, instead of uniting in 
one large, healthy, self-sustaining congregation, with 
all- the benefits and advantages of a first-class minister 
well supported, a good church and Sabbath school, 
with all the regular ministrations of the gospel. 

These things can not be affirmed of all ministers of the 
gospel, nor of all churches and communities in Missouri; 
but the facts are too common, too prominent and de- 
plorable to be overlooked in any legitimate search for 
the animus of sectarianism in Missouri. 

"Where the differences between denominations are 
essential they are agreed upon their differences and live 
in peace, each pursuing a distinct line of operations in 
its own way unmolested, and their lines rarely, if ever, 
cross each other. On the other hand, where the differ- 
ence is non-essential, they will not agree to disagree, 
and wrangling and contention, disputings and debates, 
mark the conflict. Where the difference lies in funda- 
mental doctrines, debates are rare and formal. If the 
difference lies in ecclesiastical polity, or in forms of 
worship, or in sacraments or modes of ordinances, the 
discussions are interminable and the petty disputations 
endless. The nearer denominations approach each 
other in all that is essential in doctrine, worship and 
works of righteousness, the deeper seated and more bit- 
ter the jealousy and strife between them. Non-fraterni- 
zation and non-intercourse are maintained with much 
punctiliousness between those Churches which are one 
in origin, one in doctrine, and one in all of their essen- 
tial characteristics, but which have separated from each 


other upon questions of ecclesiastical polity, or for some 
other like cause. 

Judging from the character of the strife between 
them, their methods of ecclesiastical warfare, and the 
downright animosity that enters into and characterizes 
these strifes, one would readily suppose that, according 
to their own interpretation, their peculiar commission 
is to overcome, root out, exterminate and supplant the 
church that bears the same "image and superscription." 
Particularly is this true when the essential grounds of 
difference are political. 

For confirmation of this position it is only necessary 
to refer to the two Methodist, the two Presbyterian, and 
recently the two Baptist Churches of this State, which 
are divided, not upon doctrines or ordinances, but upon 
questions of ecclesiastical polity — whether ecclesiastical 
bodies, as such, have the right to legislate upon or inter- 
meddle with questions that belong to the State, and 
must be controlled by the State. 

This allusion is sufficient for the present purpose. It 
only remains to be noted here how readily ecclesiastical 
partisans take advantage of everything in political and 
civil strife that will confer upon them power and posi- 
tion. How readily they identify themselves with domi- 
nant parties, if by so doing they can damage their ecclesi- 
astical opponents and gain position and power for them- 
selves ! How heartily they endorse the policy of the 
party in power, if by it their own disability is exchanged 
for temporary enfranchisement, and their own minority 
is invested with temporary power to oppress and perse- 
cute the hated majority! 

History repeats itself; and the genius of religious 


persecution and proscription has discovered very few 
new expedients and adopted very few new instruments 
since the days of the Master. The manger of Bethlehem 
cradled the Incarnate Innocence, and Pilate's judgment 
hall gave birth to the diabolical genius of persecution, 
which was equal to the task, in that it did there and 
then invent and employ the only expedient that could 
at once be successful in the crucifixion of Incarnate In- 
nocence, and in transmitting itself to every country and 
age with undiminished efficiency to pursue to prison 
and to death the followers of its first and greatest Yictim 
as long as time should last. The cry of disloyalty and 
treason made by ecclesiastics is now, as it always has 
been, the strongest appeal to the guardians and defend- 
ers of the State; and as that was successful before 
Pilate, and forced him to sign the death warrant of the 
Master, so it has been successful in every tribunal of 
earthly power, and procured the death warrant of all 
the martyrs in every country and age, and under every 
form of government and every phase of ecclesiasticism 
from that day to this. "We found this fellow pervert- 
ing the nation, forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, 
saying that he himself is Christ — a king." " If thou le.t 
this man go thou art not Caesar's friend ; whosoever 
maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar/' Such 
declarations made by the High Priests of the Church 
could, and did, influence the Roman Procurator against 
the convictions of his better judgment, against reason, 
against all the facts, against right and against innocence. 
What were all these to the life-blood of their victim ? 

In some form or other these charges have been re- 
peated in every systematic persecution of ministers of 
the gospel and martyrs for the truth, from Stephen, 


Antipas, Polycarp and Barnabas to the Bartholomew 
Massacre in Paris, and from the revocation of the Edict 
of Nantes and the Papal Inquisition to the last great 
tragedy in the drama, occurring during and since the 
late civil war in America, in free Missouri and under the 
aegis of institutions that boast of religious liberty, and 
the sanction of men who profess to represent the ad- 
vanced Christian civilization of the age. 

But, then, "the disciple is not above his Master, nor 
the servant above his Lord." "Kemember the word 
that I said unto you, The disciple is not above his Lord. 
If they have persecuted me they will persecute you." 

They beheaded John, crucified Christ, stoned Stephen, 
murdered Paul, "and others had trial of cruel mockings 
and scourgings, yea, moreover, of bonds and imprison- 
ment; they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were 
slain with the sword ; they wandered about in sheep- 
skins and goat-skins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented; 
of whom the world was not worthy." 

Every age and country have reproduced in some form 
the altar and tho victim, the persecutor and the perse- 
cuted, the Caiaphas and the Christ, without material 
alteration in the charge or the trial. Missouri has 
provided the altar, the wood, the fire and the sacrifice 
for the offering demanded by this age and country in the 
interest of the Church. Woods, Sexton, Glanville, 
Wollard, Eobinson, Wood, Headlee and others supplied 
the sacrifice. 

While this chapter prepares the way, in an impor- 
tant sense, for the better understanding of the subject 
in hand, it will also embody a standing declaration and 
testimony against the peculiar spirit and character of 
sectarian strife in Missouri. 



Division of the Church in 1844 — Slavery only the Occasion — Action 
of the General Conference in 1836— Slavery in the Church in 1796 
and in 1836— No Change of its Moral Aspects in 1844 — Facts Per- 
verted — Constitutional Powers of the Church — Bishop Andrew, a 
Scapegoat — Protest of the Southern Conferences — Resolution and 
Plan of Separation— Drw Elliott and Schism— The Vote— The 
Question in the South — Louisville Convention in 1845 — Division 
— The Bishops of the M. E. Church Accept the Division the 
following July — Failure to Change the Sixth Restrictive Rule — 
General Conference of 1848 Pronounce the Whole Proceedings 
Null and Void — Dr. Lovick Pierce Rejected — Fraternization 
Denied — Responsibility of Non-Fraternization — Northern Church 
Refuse to Make any Division of Property — Appeal to the Civil 
Courts — Decision of the United States Circuit Court for the 
Southern District of New York — Justice McLean — United States 
Circuit Court for the Southern District of Ohio — Judge Leavitt's 
Decision — Supreme Court of the United States — Points Decided — 
The Decision of the Supreme Court in Full. 

It is due to the uninformed that a true statement be 
made here of the causes, conditions, plan and immedi- 
ate results of the great division, in 1844, of the Metho- 
dist Episcopal Church in the United States. This is 
made the more necessary by the misrepresentation of 
the facts made by the press and pulpit of the Northern 
wing of the Church, and the political and other uses 
a perversion of the facts was made to subserve in 

1. Slavery was not, in any proper sense, the cause of 
division, but was made, incidentally, the occasion only. 
American slavery had existed in the Church for sixty 
years in the same form, and under the same civil and 
religious sanctions that authorized and covered it in 


1844. If it was the " sum of all evils " in 1844, it was 
the same in 1796 ; and the moral character of the insti- 
tution was not changed in 1836, when the General 
Conference in Cincinnati, by a vote of 120 to 14, adopted 
the following preamble and resolutions: 

" Whereas, Great excitement has prevailed in this 
•country on the subject of modern abolitionism, which 
Is reported to have been increased in this city recently 
by the unjustifiable conduct of two members of the 
General Conference, in lecturing upon and in favor of 
that agitating subject; and, whereas, such a course on 
the part of any of its members is calculated to bring 
upon this body the suspicions and distrust of the com- 
munity, and to misrepresent its sentiments in regard to 
tne points at issue ; and, whereas, in this aspect of the 
case, a due regard for its own character, as well as a 
just concern for the interests of the Church confided to 
its care, demand a full, decided and unequivocal expres- 
sion of the ideas of the General Conference in the 
premises ; therefore, 

"Resolved, By the delegates of the Annual Confer- 
ences in General Conference assembled, that they dis- 
approve, in the most unqualified sense, the conduct of 
two members of the General Conference, who are re- 
ported to have lectured in this city recently upon and 
in favor of modern abolitionism. 

"Resolved, That they are decidedly opposed to 
modern abolitionism, and wholly disdain any right, 
wish or intention to interfere in the civil and political 
relation between master and slave as it exists in the 
slaveholding States of this Union.'" — Bangs' History of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church, vol. 4, pp. 2J/.5, %Jfi. 


This is rather strong language, but not more so than 
the pastoral address issued by the same General Con- 
ference. In that address the following language is 
used : "It can not be unknown to you that the question 
of slavery in these United States, by the constitutional 
compact which binds us together as a nation, is left to 
be regulated by the several State legislatures them- 
selves, and thereby is put beyond the control of the 
general government as well as that of all ecclesiastical 
bodies, it being manifest that in the slaveholding States 
themselves the entire responsibility of its existence or 
non-existence rests with those State legislatures; and 
such is the aspect of affairs in reference to this question 
that whatever else might tend to meliorate the condi- 
tion of the slave, it is evident to ns, from what we have 
witnessed of abolition movements, that these are the 
least likely to do him good." Reasons are given amply 
sufficient to prove that abolition speeches and publica- 
tions all "tend injuriously to affect his temporal and 
spiritual condition, by hedging up the way of the mis- 
sionary who is sent to preach to him Jesus and the 
resurrection, and thereby abridging his civil and reli- 
gious privileges." 

"These facts," the address continues, "which are 
only mentioned here as reasons for the friendly admoni- 
tion which we wish to give you, constrain us, as your 
pastors, who are called to watch over your souls, as 
they who must give an account, to exhort you to 
abstain from all abolition movements and associations, 
and to refrain from patronizing any of their publica- 
tions, and especially from those of that inflammatory 
character which denounce in unmeasured terms those 


of the brethren who take the liberty to dissent from 
them." * * * * " From every view of the subject 
which we have been able to take, and from the most 
calm and dispassionate survey of the whole ground, we 
have come to the solemn conviction that the only safe, 
scriptural and prudent way for us, both as ministers and 
people, to take, is wholly to refrain from this agitating 
subject which is now convulsing the country, and con- 
sequently the Church, from end to end, by calling forth 
inflammatory speeches, papers and pamphlets. While 
we cheerfully accord to such all the sincerity they ask 
for their belief and motives, we can not but disapprove 
of their measures as alike destructive to the peace of 
the Church and the happiness of the slave/' — Bangs 1 
History of the M. E. Church, vol. £, pp. 258, 260. 

It is patent to every candid observer that the Church 
in 1836 did not consider the subject of slavery as the 
" sum of all evils/' and therefore to be extirpated at 
whatever cost to Church and State, but rather that the 
danger to the peace of the Church and country was not 
in slavery itself, but in the " abolition movements/' 
"speeches and papers" that were "convulsing the 
country and Church from end to end/' and "that the 
only safe, scriptural and prudent way for both ministers 
and people was wholly to refrain from this agitating 
subject." Slavery was, according to this address, "be~ 
yond the control of all ecclesiastical bodies," and it would 
have been fortunate for the peace and welfare of both 
the Church and the country had it remained beyond 
their control, and had the teachings and deliverances 
of all ecclesiastical bodies upon this subject remained 
just as this General Conference expressed it in 1836. 


Slavery remained unchanged; and if it was "safe, 
scriptural and prudent" for the Church in '36 to let 
it alone, and leave it under the " control of the State 
legislatures/' where "the constitutional compact which 
binds us together as a nation placed it," why was it 
not "safe, scriptural and prudent" to do the same in 
'44 ? Did slavery, as a domestic, moral or civil institu- 
tion present any new aspects in 1844 ? What civil or 
moral questions were applicable to slavery in 1844 that 
did not equally apply in 1836 or 1796 ? Had slavery 
just been admitted into the Church for the first time, 
then those who contend that it was the cause of division 
would have some show of reason. If slavery was the 
" sum of all villainy " in 1844 it was in 1793, unless time 
can change the character of " villainy," for it did not 
change the character of slavery. If a slaveholder was 
" a thief, a robber, a murderer and a sinner above all 
others" in 1844, he was the same in 1836. Nathan 
Bangs, George Peck, Charles Elliott, Orange Scott, and 
many others were members of the General Conference 
of 1836, but they did not discover such mighty man- 
defrauding, God-defying wrongs in slavery and slave- 
holders then. Their optics were different when, in 1844, 
the effort to make the institution of slavery a proper 
subject for ecclesiastical legislation, by deposing Bishop 
James 0. Andrew from the Episcopal office because his 
wife had inherited slaves, revealed the dangerous 
advances the Church had made toward the control of 
civil questions. 

In this case " certain constructions of the constitu- 
tional powers and prerogatives of the General Confer- 
ence were assumed and acted on, which were oppres- 


sive and destructive of the rights of the numerical 
minority represented in that highest judicatory of the 
Church." It was upon the "construction of the con- 
stitutional powers of the church " that they differed, 
and in the discussions and decisions that followed " cer- 
tain principles were developed in relation to the poli- 
tical aspects of slavery, involving the right of ecclesi- 
astical bodies to handle and determine matters lying 
wholly outside of their proper jurisdiction." 

No candid man who will study the philosophy of that 
memorable Conference in the light of the plain facts 
can believe that slavery was more than the occasion for 
the separation. 

"When men willfully pervert the facts of history, or 
misrepresent the connection and bearing of these facts, 
they must have a motive, and candid men are justified 
in suspecting an end that can not be reached by 
straightforward, honorable means. 

Northern Methodist preachers had become fanatical 
on the subject of the abolition of slavery — had recently 
discovered great moral wrong in the "peculiar institu- 
tion," and commenced a war upon everything that 
favored the existing relations of master and slave. All 
at once it was discovered that all the resolutions and 
pastoral address of 1836 were in sympathy with the 
"sum of all villainies," and for that reason should be 
disregarded. It was discovered that ministers of the 
gospel were slaveholders — which had been the case from 
the beginning — and the most noted instance then exist- 
ing was James O. Andrew, a man of unblemished 
character, unswerving integrity and singular purity 
of heart and life. Why not take him for a scape- 


goat ? They needed one, for many of them had been 
connected with the same institution in one way or 
another. But how could they reach his case ? Did the 
law of the Church cover the case? Did the constitu- 
tion of the Church confer upon the General Conference 
the power to depose a Bishop because his wife had in- 
herited a slave, and the laws of the State would not 
admit of emancipation ? Could not a majority of the 
General Conference so interpret and construe the law 
that the case could be reached, and the " abolition 
movement" that had been unequivocally condemned 
eight years before be just as unequivocally indorsed 
now and greatly advanced by the great Methodist 
Church in the United States ? And what if this 
assumption of constitutional power should be rejected? 
Aye, there was the rub. This was the cause. Admit the 
authority of the General Conference to depose a man 
from office for incidental or even positive complicity 
with slavery, and with it the right is established to 
depose a man from the ministry for complicity with 
democracy, republicanism, or any thing else purely 
political. The same authority extends to the ballot- 
box and all the distinctive privileges of citizenship. 

There were other questions incidentally brought out 
at the Conference of 1844 which tested the animus of 
the delegates from the North, and disclosed the con- 
struction placed by their leaders upon the constitutional 
prerogatives of the college of Bishops. 

Any one at all acquainted with ecclesiastical govern- 
ment can readily see how these questions could divide 
the Church whether slavery had an existence or not. 


The same questions have produced division in ecclesi- 
astical bodies since slavery was abolished. 

It was not the three cents a pound upon tea that 
caused the American revolution of 1776, but the right 
to tax tea to that amount involved the right to make 
every man in the British colonies a slave; and the right 
to depose Bishop Andrew implied the right to depose 
every man from the ministry who differed from the 
numerical majority upon any political question what- 

To all sober, unbiased, right-thinking, candid men 
this position will be undeniable — unanswerable. To 
others it will be like " casting pearls before swine." 

2. The plan of division provided a remedy for the 
cause of division. The one stands in the light of the 
other. When the action in the case of Bishop Andrew 
was taken in the General Conference of 1844 the dele- 
gates from thirteen Annual Conferences, making fifty- 
one in all, drew up a declaration in which they set 
forth the fact that in the slaveholding States the objects 
and purposes of the ministry would be defeated by it. 
Upon this protest the General Conference raised a 
committee of nine, six from the Northern Conferences 
and three from the Southern Conferences, to whom the 
declaration was referred. After deliberation they sub- 
mitted what is known in history and in law as the 
"Plan of Separation." 

It begins thus : 

" Whereas, A declaration has been presented to this 
Conference, with the signatures of fifty-one delegates 
of the body from thirteen Annual Conferences in the 


slaveholding States, representing that, for various rea- 
sons enumerated, the objects and purposes of the Chris- 
tian ministry and church organizations can not be suc- 
cessfully accomplished by them under the jurisdiction 
of the General Conference as now constituted ; and, 

"Whereas, In the event of a separation, a contin- 
gency to which the declaration asks attention as not 
improbable, we esteem it the duty of this General Con- 
ference to meet the contingency with Christian kind- 
ness and the strictest equity; therefore, 

" Resolved 1, Provided that should the Annual Con- 
ferences in the slaveholding States find it necessary to 
unite in a distinct ecclesiastical connection, all the 
societies, stations and Conferences bordering on the 
line of division, adhering by vote of a majority of the 
members of the society, station or Conference to either 
the Church in the South or the M. E. Church, shall 
remain under the unmolested pastoral care of the 
church to which they do adhere." 

The rule was not to apply to interior charges, which 
shall, in all cases, be left to the care of that church 
within whose territory they are situated. 

It should be observed that the Plan of Separation was 
thus agreed upon by the General Conference : " Should 
the Annual Conferences in the slaveholding States find 
it necessary to unite in a distinct ecclesiastical connec- 
tion." They were to be the sole judges of the necessity 
of such "distinct ecclesiastical connection." The "plan" 
also provided for "ministers of every grade and office " 
adhering either North or South, " without blame," and 
for a change of the sixth restrictive rule by a consti- 
tutional vote of all the Annual Conferences, so that in 


the event of separation an equitable pro rata division 
of the Book Concerns at New York and Cincinnati; and 
the Chartered Fund at Philadelphia, could be made. It 
provided, also, for the division of the property b}^ a joint 
commission, in which JST. Bangs, S. Peck and J. B. 
Fi'nly were to represent the Church North; and the 
ninth resolution was as follows : 

"Resolved 9, That all the property of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church in meeting-houses, parsonages, col- 
leges, schools, conference funds, cemeteries, and of 
every kind within the limits of the Southern organiza- 
tion, shall be forever free from any claim set up on the 
part of the Methodist Episcopal Church, so far as this 
resolution can be of force in the premises." 

It is pertinent to the case to state here that on the 
day the "committee of nine " was raised, and before it 
was formed or announced, the following resolution was 
passed, without debate : 

" Resolved, That the committee appointed to take into 
consideration the communication of the delegates from 
the Southern Conferences be instructed — provided they 
can not, in their judgment, devise a plan for the ami- 
cable adjustment of the difficulties now existing in the 
Church on the subject of slavery — to devise, if possible, 
a constitutional plan for a mutual and friendly division 
of the Church." 

The adoption of this resolution, without debate, em- 
bodied and announced the decision of the General Con- 
ference upon the constitutional powers of the body to 
divide the Church. 

An effort was made to strike the word " constitu- 
tional " from the resolution, but it failed, and the reso- 


lution as passed forms a part of the history of the 
division, bearing directly upon the constitutional pre- 
rogatives of the General Conference. 

Dr. Charles Elliott, who subsequently made himself 
notorious by denouncing the Church, South, as a seces- 
sion, and by making war upon the " Plan of Separation" 
and all that it accomplished, was the first man in the 
General Conference to move the adoption of the report 
of the committee of nine, and in a long speech he urged, 
with many arguments, the practicability, the propriety, 
the necessity and the expediency of a division of the 
Church, avowing distinctly that "were the present diffi- 
culty out of the way there would be good reason for 
passing the resolutions contained in the report. The 
body was too large to do business advantageously. 
The measure contemplated was not schism, but separa- 
tion for their mutual convenience and prosperity. 

After much debate and a full and free discussion of 
every possible point that could be raised by that able 
body of men, amongst whom were many of the best 
constitutional lawyers of the Church, the report was 
adopted ; the vote on the several resolutions varying 
from 185 to 153 in the affirmative, and from 22 to 12 in 
the negative. These were certainly very large major- 
ities, and show plainly the animus of the General Con- 
ference of 1844. 

With implicit confidence in the sincerity and good 
faith of this action, the Southern Conferences proceeded 
to ascertain whether there existed a necessity in the 
Southern Stales for the separation thus provided for. 

The Southern Conferences were to be the sole judges 
of the necessity for such action as would make this pro- 


visional separation a real one; and that in their judg- 
ment such necessity did exist, the history is in proof. 
However greatly the opinions and purposes of men may 
change, the facts of history that have gone to official 
record can not change. Upon such facts intelligent 
judgment alone can rest, and to such facts an honest 
public will always make a final appeal. 

" The Annual Conferences in the slaveholding States" 
did "find it necessary to unite in a distinct ecclesiastical 
connection/' and for that purpose met in convention, in 
Louisville, Ky., in 1845, and reduced the possible con- 
tingency to fact. In the organization of a " distinct 
ecclesiastical connection " the Louisville convention 
adhered strictly to the plan adopted by the General 
Conference of 1844. The division of the church into 
two distinct co-ordinate branches, which was considered 
a contingency, and, as such, provided for in 1844, was, 
by the action of the " Annual Conferences in the slave- 
holding States " represented in the convention at 
Louisville, made an accomplished fact in 1845. After 
this convention erected the " Annual Conferences in 
the slaveholding States " into a " distinct ecclesiastical 
connection " the Bishops of the M. E. Church (North) 
met in 'New York, July, 1845, and passed, among others, 
the following resolution : 

" Resolved, That the plan adopted in regard to a dis- 
tinct ecclesiastical connection, should such a course be 
found necessary by the Annual Conferences of the 
slaveholding States, is regarded by us as of binding 
obligation in the premises, so far as our administration 
is concerned." 

They also gave instructions respecting the voting of 


"those societies bordering on the line of division, to 
decide for themselves whether they would adhere to the 
Church North or South." And they further declared 
that they did not feel justified in presiding over the 
Conferences South, and struck them from their plan of 
Episcopal visitation. Thus the Bishops of the Church, 
North, quietly and gracefully resigned their jurisdiction 
over the Southern Conferences, because they considered 
the "Plan of Separation " adopted in 1844 of "binding 

The division of the Church was recognized by the 
Eishops of the North as an accomplished fact, and the 
"Plan of Separation" as of "binding obligation." And it 
may fairly be assumed that, had there been no property 
interests to be divided according to that plan, pro rata, 
there would have been " a mutual and friendly division 
of the Church/ ' But after the separation had been 
accomplished and recognized as legitimate and of 
"binding obligation," the Northern wing of the Church 
discovered that the required vote of the Annual Con- 
ferences to change the sixth restrictive rule was not 
obtained, and the pretext was furnished them to refuse 
a pro rata or any other division of the property that 
was held by the Northern Church, which consisted of a 
Book Concern in New York, what was known as a 
Chartered Fund in Philadelphia, and a Book Con- 
cern in Cincinnati. 

To ignore and set aside the claims of the Church, 
South, to the common property it was necessary to pro- 
nounce the General Conference of 1844 incompetent to 
divide the Church, and to declare the "Plan of Separa- 
tion null and void," so that "there should exist no 


obligations to observe its provisions." This was done 
by the Northern G-eneral Conference of 1848, after the 
separation had been acknowledged by their Bishops as 
an accomplished fact, and the " Plan of Separation " as 
of "binding obligation." 

Dr. Lovick Pierce, father of Bishop Pierce, and the 
noblest Eoman of all, was duly accredited to this 
General Conference of 1848 as the fraternal messenger 
of the Church, South, to express to that body the 
Christian regards and fraternal salutations of his Church. 
Upon the reception of his credentials the General Con- 
ference "Resolved, That as there are serious questions 
and difficulties existing between the two bodies it is not 
proper at present to enter into fraternal relations with 
the M. E. Church, South." 

Fraternal intercourse was declined by official action. 
The door was shut, and the fraternal messenger of the 
Church, South, stood without, feeling most keenly the 
unchristian rejection. That he felt the dishonor, the 
humiliation, the insult thus offered to his Church most 
sensibly the closing words of his communication to that 
body, upon being notified of his rejection, is in evidence : 
"You will now regard this communication as final on 
the part of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. 
She can never renew the offer of fraternal relations 
between the two great bodies of "Wesleyan Methodism 
in the United States. But the proposition can be re- 
newed at any time, either now or hereafter, by the 
Methodist Episcopal Church ; and if ever made, upon 
the basis of the Plan of Separation as adopted by the 
General Conference of 1844, the Church, South, will 
cordially entertain the proposition." 


His language to the General Conference of the 
Church, South, in submitting his report to that body, 
was worthy of the great cause he was delegated to serve, 
worthy of his Church, and worthy of himself. One 
single sentence of that report illustrates the whole, and 
reflects the highest honor on his head and heart : " Thus 
ended the well-intended commission from your body. 
Upon this noble effort I verily believe the smile of 
Divine approbation will rest when the heavenly bodies 
themselves have ceased to shine. We did affectionately 
endeavor to make and preserve peace, but our offer was 
rejected as of no deserving." 

He returned home and, with his entire Church, had 
to accept the situation thus decreed by the M. E. Church, 
North. And with the responsibility of n on -fraterniza- 
tion rests the shame and disgrace of the fact, in the 
estimation of the enlightened Christian world, as well 
as all the damaging results. 

But the Church, North, knowing that the Church, 
South, could not be divested of her legal rights to the 
property otherwise, proceeded to set aside the Plan of 
Separation, to pronounce the Church, South, a schism, 
and to decline all fraternal intercourse. Thus cut off 
as illegitimate, as schismatics and as secessionists, by an 
action wholly ex parte, all claim upon the common 
Church property was denied, and all the authority of 
commissions to settle with the Church, South, was re- 

An appeal to the civil courts was thus made necessary, 
and the strong arm of the civil law was evoked to force 
the unwilling conscience of the Northern Church, and 
to become " a judge and a divider over us." 


It is unnecessary to give in detail the history of these 
civil suits. Suffice it to say, that the United States 
Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York 
and the Supreme Court of the United States both recog- 
nized and affirmed the authority of the General Con- 
ference to divide the Church, pronounced that body 
competent to provide apian of separation, fix a boundary 
line, determine the status of ministers, adjust the rights 
of property, and erect two separate and distinct ecclesi- 
astical bodies, of co-ordinate existence and authority, 
out of the M. E. Church of the United States. These 
highest judicial tribunals of the country did affirm the 
validity of the " Plan of Separation " adopted by the 
General Conference of 1844 to be of "binding obliga- 
tion" in every part and particular; and, notwithstand- 
ing the failure of the sixth restrictive rule, the United 
States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New 
York caused a decree to be entered, November 26th, 
1851, ordering a pro rata share of the property of the 
New York Book Concern, including both capital and 
produce, to be transferred to the agents of the M. E. 
Church, South, and it was referred to the Clerk of the 
Court to ascertain the amount and value of the property. 
TV"hen he reported, exceptions were filed, the Court 
could not agree upon some points, and the case was 
certified to the Supreme Court of the United States for 

Judge McLean, a leading member of the M. E. Church, 
and at the time one of the Justices of the United States 
Supreme Court, induced the Commissioners of the two 
parties to come together in New York. The result of 
this interview was an agreement between them about 


dividing the property of the New York Book Concern, 
which agreement was afterward made a part of the 
decree of the U. S. Circuit Court, December 8th, 1852. 
By this decree the property of the New York Book 
Concern was settled, of which the Church, South, ob- 
tained about $191,000. 

It may not be out of place to insert here apart of the 
decision of the United States Circuit Court for the 
Southern District of' New York, Justice Nelson and 
Judge Betts presiding. The former delivered the 
opinion of the Court. 

After analyzing the Plan of Separation, the decision 
of the Court goes on to say : "Now, it will be seen from 
this analysis of the Plan of Separation that the only 
condition or contingency upon which an absolute 
division of the Church organization was made to de- 
pend was the action of the several Annual Conferences 
in the slaveholding States. If these should find it 
necessary to unite in favor of a distinct organization, 
by the very terms of the Plan the separation was to take 
place according to the boundary designated. It was 
left to them to judge of the necessity, and their judg- 
ment is made final in the matter. And when the divi- 
sion is made, and the Church divided into two separate 
bodies, it is declared that ministers of every grade and 
office in the Methodist Episcopal Church may, as they 
prefer, remain in that Church, or without blame attach 
themselves to the Church, South. The whole Plan of 
Separation confirms this view. As soon as the separa- 
tion takes place, in accordance with the first resolution, 
all the property in meeting-houses, parsonages, colleges, 
schools, Conference funds and cemeteries, within the 


limits of the Southern organization is declared to be 
free from any claim on the part of the Northern Church. 
The general and common property, such as notes and 
other obligations, together with the property and effects 
belonging to the printing establishments at Charleston, 
Eichmond and Nashville, and the capital and produce 
ofHhe Book Concern at New York, was reserved for 
future adjustment. This was necessary on account of 
the restrictive article upon the power of the General 
Conference. * * * When the Annual Con- 
ferences in the slaveholding States acted, and organized 
a Southern Church, as they did, the division of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church into two organizations 
became complete. And so would the adjustment of the 
common property between them, if the assent of all the 
Annual Conferences had been given to the change of 
the restrictive article. The failure to give that has left 
this part of the plan open, the only consequence of 
which is to deprive the Southern division of its share of 
the property dependent upon this assent, and leave it 
to get along as it best may, unless a right to recover its 
possession legally results from the authorized division 
into two separate organizations." 

The suit for a division in the Cincinnati Book Concern 
was brought in the United States Circuit Court for the 
District of Ohio, July 12th, 1849. The evidence agreed 
on by the counsel for both parties was the same used in 
the New York case. Justice McLean declined to sit in 
the case, because he had previously expressed his 
opinion that the Sixth Restrictive Rule could be con- 
stitutionally modified by the General and Annual Con- 


ferences so as "to authorize an equitable division of the 
fund with the M. E. Church, South. " 

Judge Leavitt presided, and reached the decision that 
"the General Conference possessed no authority, di- 
rectly or indirectly, to divide the Church." And that, 
as the Annual Conferences did not change the Sixth 
Restrictive Rule, the Church, South, could not recover; 
and dismissed the suit. He said, however, that the 
power to divide the Church "rested with the body of 
the traveling ministry, assembled en masse in a conven- 
tional capacity/' This was fatal to his whole decision ; 
for since the first delegated General Conference in 1808, 
the whole body of the traveling ministry had been as- 
sembling by delegation every four years, and authorized 
to exercise all the powers of the entire body of travel- 
ing preachers, six clearly defined restrictions on its 
powers only excepted. 

From the decision of Judge Leavitt the Commissioners 
of the M. E. Church, South, appealed to the Supreme 
Court of the United States. That august tribunal was 
then composed of Chief Justice Taney, and Associate 
Justices McLean, Wayne, Catron, Daniel, Nelson, Grier, 
Curtis and Campbell. (Justice McLean did not sit in 
the case.) 

The cause was heard in Washington City, in April, 
1854, and the decision in favor of the rights of the 
Church, South, was without dissent from any of the 
Justices. Judge Nelson delivered the opinion of the 
Court, April 25th, 1854. The main points settled by 
that decision are these : (1) That the Methodist Episco- 
pal Church in the United States was divided. (2) It 
was not a secession of a part from the main body. (3) 


By it neither division lost its interest in the common 
property. (4) The General Conference of 1844 had the 
power to divide the Church into two distinct ecclesias- 
tical bodies. (5) The six restrictive articles did not 
deprive the General Conference of the authority and 
power to divide the Church. (6) The proposed change 
of the Sixth Restrictive Eule was not a condition of 
separation, but to enable the General Conference to 
carry out its purpose. (7) The separation of the 
Church into two distinct parts being legally accom- 
plished, the "Plan of Separation" must be carried out 
in good faith, and a division of the joint property by a 
Court of Equity follows as a matter of course. 

By this decision of the Supreme Court the M. E. 
Church, South, obtained from the Cincinnati Book Con- 
cern, in money, bonds, Southern notes and accounts, 
about $93,000. 

These facts have all been gathered from official docu- 
ments, and will not be denied. If they serve to place 
before the public, in a succinct form, the true history of 
the division of the Church, and by so doing countervail 
the many misrepresentations and mischievous false- 
hoods that have led to the unprovoked persecutions of 
the ministers of the M. E. Church, South, in Missouri 
and elsewhere, the end will be reached and the labor 
will not be in vain. 

As the decision of the Supreme Court of the United 
States in the above case is not accessible to every reader, 
it may serve the purpose of history, while it serves the 
cause of truth and righteousness, to put in convenient 
form, and as a befitting close to this chapter, that de- 
cision in full — except so much of it as was necessary to 
carry out the decree of the Court in detail. 



"William A. Smith, et oil., vs. Leroy Swormstedt, et at. 

"This was the appeal from the Circuit Court of the 
United States for the District of Ohio, which dismissed 
the bill. 

" This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of 
the record from the Circuit Court of the United States 
for the District of Ohio, and was argued by counsel. 
On consideration whereof it is ordered, adjudged and 
decreed by this Court that the decree of said Circuit 
Court in this cause be and the same is hereby reversed 
and annulled ; and this Court doth farther find, adjudge 
and decree : 

u 1. That under the resolution of the General Confer- 
ence of the Methodist EjDiscopal Church, holden at the 
city of New York, according to the usage and discipline 
of said Church, passed on the eighth day of June, in 
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and 
forty-four (in the pleadings mentioned), it was, among 
other things, and in virtue of the power of said General 
Conference, well agreed and determined by the Metho- 
dist Episcopal Church in the United States of America, 
as then existing, that in case the Annual Conferences 
in the slaveholding States should find it necessary to 
unite in a distinct ecclesiastical connection,- the minis- 
ters, local and traveling, of every grade and office in the 
Methodist Episcopal Church, might attach themselves 
to such new ecclesiastical connection without blame. 

" 2. That the said Annual Conferences in the slave- 
holding States did find and determine that it was right, 
expedient and necessary to erect the Annual Confer- 


ences last aforesaid into a distinct ecclesiastical connec- 
tion, based upon the discipline of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church aforesaid, comprehending the doctrines and 
entire moral and ecclesiastical rules and regulations of 
the said discipline (except only in so far as verbal alter- 
ations might be necessary to or for a distinct organiza- 
tion), which new ecclesiastical connection was to be 
known by the name and style of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, South, and that the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
South, was duly organized under said resolutions of the 
said Annual Conferences last aforesaid, in a convention 
thereof held at Louisville, in the State of Kentucky, in 
the month of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand 
eight hundred and forty-five. 

"3. That by force of the said resolutions of June the 
eighth, eighteen hundred and forty-four, and of the 
authority and power of the said General Conference of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church, as then existing, by 
which the same were adopted ; and by virtue of the said 
finding and determination of the said Annual Confer- 
ences in the slaveholding States therein mentioned, and 
by virtue of the organization of such Conferences into 
a distinct ecclesiastical connection as last aforesaid, the 
religious association known as the Methodist Episcopal 
Church in the United States of America, as then existing, 
was divided into two associations, or distinct Methodist 
Episcopal Churches, as in the bill of complaint is alleged. 

"4. That the property denominated the Methodist 
Book Concern at Cincinnati, in the pleadings men- 
tioned, was, at the time of said division and immedi- 
ately before, a fund subject to the following use, that is 
to say, that the profits arising therefrom, after retain- 


ing a sufficient capital to cany on the business thereof, 
were to be regularly applied toward the support of the 
deficient traveling, supernumerary, superannuated and 
worn-out p reach ers of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
their wives, widows and children, according to the rules 
and Discipline of said church, and that the said fund 
and property are held under the act of incorporation in 
the said answer mentioned by the said defendants, 
Leroy Swormstedt and John H. Power, as agents of 
said Book Concern, and in trust for the purposes 

" 5. That, in virtue of the said division of said Metho- 
dist Episcopal Church in the United States, the defi- 
cient, traveling, supernumerary, superannuated and 
worn-out preachers, their wives, widows and children 
comprehended in, or in connection with the Methodist 
Episcopal Church, South, were, are, and continue to be, 
beneficiaries of the said Book Concern to the same ex- 
tent and as fully as if the said division had not taken 
place, and in the same manner and degree as persons 
of the same description who are comprehended in, or 
in connection with, the other association, denominated, 
since the division, the Methodist Episcopal Church, and 
that as well the principal as the profits of said Book 
Concern, since said division, should of right be admin- 
istered and managed by the respective General and 
Annual Conferences of the said two associations and 
Churches under the separate organizations thereof, and 
according to the shares or proportions of the same as 
hereinafter mentioned, and in conformity with the rules 
and Discipline of said respective associations, so as to 
carry out the purposes and trusts aforesaid. 


" 6. That so much of the capital and property of said 
Book Concern at Cincinnati, wherever situated, and so 
much of the produce and profits thereof as may not 
have been heretofore accounted for to said Church, 
South, in the New York case hereinafter mentioned, or 
otherwise, shall be paid to said Church, South, accord- 
ing to the rate and proportions following, that is to 
say : In respect to the capital, such share or part as 
corresponds with the proportion which the number of 
the traveling preachers in the Annual Conferences 
which formed themselves into the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, South, bore to the number of all the traveling- 
preachers of the Methodist Episcopal Church before 
the division thereof, which numbers shall be fixed and 
ascertained as they are shown by the' minutes of the 
several Annual Conferences next preceding the said 
division and new organization in the month of May, A. 
D. eighteen hundred and forty-five. 

" And in respect to the produce and profits, such 
share or part as the number of Annual Conferences 
which formed themselves into the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, South, bore at the time of said division in May, 
A. D. 1845, to the whole number of Annual Confer- 
ences then being in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
excluding the Liberia Conference, so that the division 
or apportionment of said produce and profits shall be 
had by Conferences, and not by numbers of the travel- 
ing preachers. 

" 7. That said payment of capital and profits, accord- 
ing to the ratios of appointment so declared, shall be 
made and paid to the said Smith, Parsons and Green, 
as Commissioners aforesaid, or their successors, on be- 


half of said Chuch, South, and the beneficiaries therein, 
or to such other person or persons as may be thereto 
authorized by the General Conference of said Church, 
South, the same to be subsequently managed and ad- 
ministered so as to carry out the trusts and uses afore- 
said, according to the Discipline of said Church, South, 
and the regulations of the General Conference thereof." 




Provisions of the Plan of Separation — Time of Division — The 
Missouri a Border Conference — Vote on Adhering North or 
South nearly Unanimous — The Disaffected — Covenant Breakers 
— The M. E. Church in Missouri after the Division — Her Minis- 
ters and Members — How Regarded — Relative Strength of the 
Two Churches in Numbers and Property — Sympathy — Perse- 
cution — Tenacity in Spite of Opposition — Success the only Revenge 
— The Class of Northern Methodist Preachers — Their Connection 
with Clandestine Efforts to Free the Slaves — Their Condemnation 
and their Secret Service — Character of the Old Missourians — 
Their Vindication — Northern Methodists Condemned for being 
Secret Political Partisans, and not for Preaching the Gospel — The 
Anti-Slavery Element in Missouri Ten Years before the War — 
Lawful vs. Clandestine Means — "Underground Railroad" and 
other Nefarious Schemes to Run off the Slaves of Missouri — These 
Things Condemned by the Anti-Slavery Party — Public Meetings 
of Citizens in the Interest of Order and Peace. 

The " Plan of Separation " adopted by the General 
Conference of 1844, to which attention is given in the 
preceding chapter, fixed the line of separation along 
the line of division between the free and the slavehold- 
ing States, for the most part, and provided as follows, 
to- wit : 

" 1. That, should the Annual Conferences in the slave- 
holding States find it necessary to unite in a distinct 
ecclesiastical connection, the following rule shall be 
observed with regard to the northern boundary of such 
connection : All the societies, stations and Conferences 
adhering to the Church in the South, by a vote of a 


majority of the members of said societies, stations and 
Conferences, shall remain under the unmolested pas- 
toral care of the Southern Church, and the ministers of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church shall in no wise 
attempt to organize churches or societies within the 
limits of the Church, South, nor shall they attempt to 
exercise any pastoral oversight therein : it being under- 
stood that the ministry of the Church, South, reciprocally 
observe the same rule in relation to societies, stations 
and Conferences adhering by vote of a majority to 
the Methodist Episcopal Church ; provided, also, that 
this rule shall apply only to societies, stations and Con- 
ferences bordering on the line of division, and not to 
interior charges, which shall in all cases be left to the 
care of that Church within whose territory they may 
be situated." — General Conference Journal, vol. 2, p. 135. 

The Missouri Annual Conference was one of the Con- 
ferences " bordering on the line of division," and the 
question of adhering North or South was thoroughly 
canvassed and decided almost unanimously in favor of 
the South. Those ministers favoring the North were 
allowed to adhere North "without blame," by the 
"Plan of Separation." They were seven out of one 
hundred and thirty-six. 

Prior to the session of the Conference in Columbia, 
in the fall of 1845, when the vote was taken, the 
" societies and stations," along the border particularly, 
were asked to decide by a vote of the members 
whether they would adhere North or South. The 
vote was so nearly unanimous in favor of adhering 
South that not a single "society or station" in the 
Conference gave a majority in favor of adhering 


North, and in very few of them was there a division at 
all. In a few societies along the border, such as St. 
Louis, Hannibal, Lagrange and some others, and a few 
scattering societies in the interior, there was a small 
minority in favor of adhering North. These were 
generally men recently from the Northern States, or 
mal-contents who rejoiced in the occasion thus afforded 
to seek notoriety or revenge in a contentious faction. 
Such persons are found, more or less, in every com- 
munity, and unfortunately for the peace of society some 
sections of Missouri unwittingly offered special induce- 
ments to that class of immigrants, and received quite a 
large surplus of them from the older States. Amongst 
the few disaffected of Missouri Methodists who would 
not go with the majority in this division may have been 
some honorable exceptions, but they were few and far 
between, and only prove the general rule. 

The vote to adhere South was so general in the State 
that no one thought of accepting the tt pastoral care " 
of the ministers of the M. E. Church, North, until after 
that Church had pronounced the "Plan of Separation 
null and void," and had proceeded to violate their 
plighted faith and disregard every "binding obligation 
in the premises." 

The right and authority of one party to set aside and 
declare "null and void" a solemn contract or covenant 
entered into by two parties, without the consent of the 
other party, is not debatable. The failure of the sixth 
restrictive rule, according to the decision of the United 
States Supreme Court, did not vitiate the covenant, nor 
had the M. E. Church, South, up to 1854, by act or 
deed, according to the same high authority, forfeited 


the covenant to the other party by any failure to com- 
ply with its provisions. 

The assumption of authority, therefore, by the M. E. 
Church to set aside the conditions of the covenant, to 
violate what their Bishops had pronounced its " binding 
obligations in the premises," to reject the fraternal 
messenger and ignore the claims of the Church, South, 
and proceed to " organize churches and societies within 
the limits of the Church, South," could only exhibit to 
the world their utter recklessness of moral obligation 
and place them before the public as covenant breakers, 
"truce breakers and false accusers." 

In such light were they and their friends and abettors 
held in Missouri, after the Church in the whole State 
had decided so positively to adhere South. Indeed, so 
general was this decision, that for many years after the 
division the existence of the M. E. Church, North, in 
Missouri was scarcely suspected by the best informed. 

There were but few places in the State where their 
presence was tolerated; not because of any religious or 
political proscription and persecution, but because their 
presence in Missouri was not only unauthorized, but in 
direct violation of the most solemn ecclesiastical com- 
pact, for which an instinctive sense of right in every 
community was disposed to hold the Northern Metho- 
dist preachers responsible. 

All our best notions of religious toleration revolt at 
the idea of proscribing the largest liberties of any 
church in any country or community for any reasons. 
But, then, when a church deliberately proscribes herself 
and fixes her own limits of territory, transferring all 
her claims to property and privileges beyond her self- 


appointed boundaries to another and a "distinct ecclesi- 
astical organization," a decent respect for moral obliga- 
tion and the covenanted rights of others demand that 
every enlightened community should hold every such 
church to the strictest accountability for every violation 
of her self-imposed obligations. Covenant breakers 
forfeit their claims to all the benefits of the covenant 
broken, if they do not forfeit their claims upon the con- 
fidence and protection of the community whose rights 
and privileges the broken covenant respected. 

Communities whose sense of justice and moral right 
are outraged by religious teachers, to whom neither 
civil nor criminal law will apply, have recourse only to 
a public sentiment which can place the guilty under the 
ban of public condemnation. The Northern Methodist 
preachers who were trying to " organize societies " and 
" exercise pastoral care " in Missouri, from the division 
of the Church in 1844 to the beginning of the civil war 
in 1861, need not be reminded how terrible and general 
was this ban of public condemnation. It was not a 
proscription which they themselves had not authorized ; 
nor could they claim the benefits of a persecution for 
righteousness' sake without confessing to an indictment 
which truth and honesty found against them for obtain- 
ing said benefits under false pretenses. They raised 
the cry of persecution, but failed to enlist the popular 
sympathy due to such a cry, because the virtues and 
elements of a religious persecution were all wanting. 
They, nevertheless, managed to keep up a factious, 
feeble organization in some places in the State, sus- 
tained by missionary money from the North, which 
took advantage of every popular excitement against 


them to manufacture foreign sympathy, and, at the 
same time, furnished a convenient refuge for the dis- 
affected, mal-contents, of the M. E. Church, South. 

They sought, by maintaining a convenient proximity 
to the Southern Church, not only to catch the Metho- 
dist immigration from the North, but, also, to afford a 
convenient retreat for those who seek in prominence 
what they lack in piety, and to " beguile unstable souls " 
with the false plea of " Old Church " and « Old Metho- 
dism." Thus, while serving all the purposes of fac- 
tious agitation, and furnishing in themselves an ex- 
ample of covenant breaking for covetousness' sake, 
which can never be reproduced and re-enacted, they 
have, also, served the purposes of peace and purity by 
receiving from other churches the contentious, the dis- 
satisfied and the disaffected. It was an easy road to a 
miserable revenge, as it was often a happy riddance of 
a pestilent element, while the rule of loss and gain was 

The relation of the two churches during that period 
to the people of the whole State will be seen in their 
statistics. At the time of the division the whole Church 
in Missouri numbered 26,310 members, served by 113 
traveling preachers. In 1850 the M. E. Church, South, 
had 27,012 members and 126 traveling preachers in 
Missouri alone. In 1850 the M. E. Church, North, had 
5,474 members and fifty-one traveling preachers in 
Missouri and Arkansas together. 

The relative strength of the two churches in 1860 is 
seen in the following figures: The M. E. Church, 
South, had 48,797 members and 243 traveling preachers, 


and the M. E. Church, North, had 6,619 members and 
sixty-nine traveling preachers. 

In church property there was a much greater differ- 
ence. When the Church divided, all the property in 
churches, parsonages, cemeteries, colleges, Conference 
funds, and of every other description, passed into the 
hands of the M. E. Church, South, according to the 
"Plan of Separation." Those who voted to adhere 
North were not strong enough in any one place to set 
up any claim to the Church property. The Church, 
North, was thus left without houses of worship or any 
other property possessions in the State. By common 
consent, as well as by the decision of the courts, the 
division of the Church extinguished the right and title 
of the M. E. Church to all property in the State of 
Missouri. The struggle for existence, under the circum- 
stances, was a forlorn hope, and the erection of churches 
in communities where they were not in sympathy with 
either the masses or the moneyed people was a slow 
and doubtful enterprise. They had to rely, for the 
most part, upon private houses in obscure neighbor- 
hoods for places of public worship, for it was not always 
that they could even get the use of school houses for 
that purpose. In St. Louis they had one Church, 
Ebenezer, which had to supply them with church 
facilities for the whole State for many years. They 
built a small church in Hannibal in 1850. In 1856 
they added Simpson Chapel, in St. Louis, to the list, 
and then, in 1858, they erected a small brick church in 
Jefferson City, for which they had help from abroad. 
These were all small churches, but amply sufficient for 
all their wants. They may have had a few other small 


churches in different sections of the State, but their 
number and resources were quite small, and their in- 
fluence for good in each community was unfortunately- 
counteracted by the spirit of contention and strife they 
created. In 1860 the whole of their Church property 
in this State and in Arkansas was estimated in their 
statistics at $36,400. 

Under these circumstances it is not surprising if they 
made up in bitter, spiteful jealousies what they lacked 
in the true elements of success, and repaid the public 
disapprobation in a dogged tenacity that seeks revenge 
in success despite all opposition. 

They had no friendly feeling for the Church, South, 
and gladly and freely employed every means to disaffect 
and disintegrate the Southern organization, especially 
in obscure neighborhoods. Nor did they scruple at the 
grossest misrepresentations of the facts concerning the 
division of the Church. 

Their preachers traversed the State and visited every 
family that was suspected of being in sympathy with 
them ; and wherever two or three could be gathered 
together of kindred sympathy they were organized into 
a society, regularly visited, and made a nucleus around 
which to gather the disaffected and disappointed of the 
M. E. Church, South. 

The preachers engaged in this work were not of the 
class and style of men whose ministrations would 
reach and affect the intelligent and cultivated portions 
of the people. They were, for the most part, rough, 
uncultivated and illiterate, and hence their social and 
intellectual affinities were found among the lower classes 
and the ignorant. They were the kind of men to be 


doggedly pertinacious, and to know nothing amongst 
men outside of one idea, one purpose, one cause. They 
looked upon everything that did not favor them and 
their cause as wrong per se, and considered their mission 
unfulfilled until it was righted or removed. 

They had more patience than charity. They could 
bide their time, but could not tolerate opposition. They 
could proscribe, and even persecute, others for opinion's 
sake, but could not endure with fortitude the reflex 
influence of their own bigotry. 

Public opinion and Jesuitical policy required them to 
be discreet as ministers of the gospel in their public 
performances, but as partisans they were strangely in- 
discreet. They were sent into Missouri by the authorities 
of their Church distinctly and thoroughly indoctrinated 
in the belief that the success of the Church whose cre- 
dentials they bore was in the success of the anti-slavery 
party; hence they were secret and earnest partisans 
out of the pulpit. They associated with abolitionists, 
and warmly espoused every measure for the abolition 
of slavery. Whether right or wrong, slavery existed 
then by the authority of the Constitution of the State 
and under the protection of her laws ; and, like all other 
men, slaveholders could not surrender tamely their con- 
stitutional and legal rights to that species of property 
in which they had invested their money, much less 
could they look with indifference upon the presence and 
movements of men who were seeking by clandestine, 
" under-ground " methods to render insecure their pro- 
perty by means neither open nor honorable. 

No class of men were more favorably circumstanced 
for the prosecution of such a work than these Northern 


Methodist preachers, and they were considered by the 
abolition party as indispensable to final success. 

It was in the character of partisans, and not ministers, 
that they were put under the ban of public sentiment. 
The fact that they were ministers of the gospel, and 
that they used the privileges of their profession to fur- 
ther the objects of a party that sought by unlawful and 
disingenuous means the extirpation of slavery, made 
their presence, character and work the more offensive 
to the people of the State. The common opinion among 
men who cared less for the institutions of Christianity 
than for the institutions of the State was that the 
Northern Methodist preachers in this State were wolves 
in sheep's clothing. Only by an unseemly torture of 
facts could they make it appear that they were opposed 
and persecuted because they were ministers of the 

"When ministers of the gospel become political parti- 
sans, and expect their high calling to protect them in a 
sinister attempt to abolish the institutions and laws 
under which the rights of property are protected, they 
should not complain if honorable men detect and de- 
nounce the hypocrisy. 

The spirit of reckless insubordination that animated 
these fanatical preachers has often, of late, found em- 
phatic utterance through their Church papers. This is 
its language : " We must teach people to make better 
laws, or trample upon such as are made, if we expect to 
meet God in peace." 

But in those days the utterance was in the signs and 
symbols of secret societies, and the execution was in the 
by-ways, around the corners, in " Uncle Tom's cabin/' 


in occasional doses of poison and midnight arson, with 
the aid of butcher-knives, axes and " under-ground 
railroads." For such work true ministers of the gospel 
are never held responsible; but when it is incited and 
aided by those calling themselves such, the verdict of 
double guilt can not be escaped. 

It would be as unfair to say that all Northern Metho- 
dist preachers in the State engaged in this nefarious 
business as to say that none of them were respectable, 
Christian gentlemen. Suspicion rested upon all of 
them, because the grounds of suspicion were too strong 
and the evidence of guilt too general to make wholesale 
exceptions. Nor did the masses of the people know or 
care to discriminate. 

It is true that very few men of worth, of ability, or 
of standing in the M. E. Church could be had for this 
work. They looked upon it as involving much toil, 
sacrifice, suffering, and perhaps martyrdom, for which 
they were not candidates. But men who had broken 
down in other fields, and were no longer wanted in 
other Conferences, and men who had despaired of dis- 
tinction in the more honorable fields of competition 
with their brethren, embraced the opportunity thus 
afforded to win notoriety. 

The men who could consent to do such work for a 
political party while they wore the cloth of a holy call- 
ing were the pliant tools of the John Browns and others 
who were prominent leaders in the great crusade against 
the institutions of the South. 

It is due to the truth of history to state that the old 
settlers of Missouri and the slaveholders of that day 
were high-minded, honorable, intelligent men, who 


would scorn to proscribe and persecute men for opinion's 
sake, or protect and harbor men who would secretly 
and treacherously use the hospitality of the slaveholder 
to reach the slave and poison his mind against his 
master, and inspire him with the hope of freedom by 
the torch and the dagger. 

Missourians were not hypocrites, nor would they 
abuse a generous hospitality, betray either public or 
social confidence, or seek by underhanded, sinister 
means the destruction of the rights of property and the 
guarantees of domestic and social order. However they 
may be characterized by ugly epithets and maligned by 
partisan hirelings, they will stand vindicated on the 
pages of history as humane, generous, peaceful, pros- 
perous, intelligent, honorable and high-minded citizens, 
who could neither perpetrate a mean act nor tolerate, 
even in so-called ministers of the gospel, the abuse of 
confidence or domestic treachery. 

In illustration of the abuse of hospitality to secret 
abolition purposes, one instance in a thousand must 

In the spring of 1856 Mr. Thomas E. Thompson, of 
Palmyra, Mo., was returning home late on Saturday 
evening, when he found a stranger by the road side 
preparing to camp in a corner of the fence, with his wife 
and child. He had unharnessed his team and stretched 
his wagon cloth on the fence over them for a shelter 
from the inclement weather. 

Mr. Thompson stopped and inquired why the stranger 
did not go into the city and obtain better accommoda- 
tions ; and when informed that he had no money, and 
thought of spending not only the night but the follow- 


ing Sabbath there, and that the stranger was a Northern 
Methodist preacher trying to get to Kansas, he told him 
it would not do, invited them to his house, and offered 
them a generous hospitality, which was accepted. The 
child had never seen negroes, was much alarmed at the 
sight, and would not remain in their presence. 

During the night the preacher got to talking to one 
of the colored women, tried to persuade her that she 
was free, and that he would assist her to reach Illinois. 
She reported the facts to Mr. T. j and on Sabbath after- 
noon he overheard the preacher talking with the hus- 
band of this woman in the stable, telling him that he 
was not only a free man, but that he would do right in 
taking Mr. T.'s horse, or anything else by which he 
could gain his freedom. The negro told the preacher 
to go off and let him alone, that he had a good master, 
a good home and everything in plenty, and he did not 
want to be free. Mr. Thompson ordered the preacher 
to leave, telling him that he could not protect him from 
violence if the community were apprised of the facts. 
He let him depart in peace. 

If Northern Methodist preachers were condemned, 
it was not for preaching the gospel and trying to- 
save the souls of men, but for a palpable violation of 
plighted ecclesiastical faith, and more particularly for 
their partisan services in the cause of emancipation. 

Let it be understood, also, that Missourians did not 
so much oppose the emancipation of their slaves as they 
did the means used to accomplish it. For thousands of 
slaveholders believed that the abolition of slavery 
would be a blessing both to the slave and the master, 
if it could be done in a lawful and peaceable way. Many 


of them were laboring to reach the result through a 
political organization, by open-handed, lawful means. 

For ten years before the war it was a foregone con- 
clusion with the more intelligent classes that slavery 
would be abolished in Missouri, and a system of free labor 
adopted that would be more successful in developing the 
resources of the State. But they looked for it to be 
done by a change of the Constitution and the necessary 
legislation ; and, while they expected this result to be 
reached in a lawful way, they heartily detested the 
secret organizations and treacherous agents that were 
seeking to decoy the slave from his master, and furnish 
facilities for his escape from bondage, and his protection 
from the legal claims of his owner. 

This was against law, in contravention of law, and in 
flagrant violation of constitutional guaranties, which all 
the courts and officers of the country were sworn to 
protect and enforce ; and hence it was considered by 
the people and the courts — by the law and the gospel — 
a crime against the peace and dignity of the State. But 
it was one of those crimes which either could not be 
covered by statutory enactments, or in the commission 
of which the statute could be evaded or the guilty party 

Legal processes could not be served ; the law could 
be set at defiance while the mischief was being done ; 
and the only recourse left to the people was in such 
protection as they could devise outside of the law. 
Some carried their slaves into the Southern States and 
disposed of them. And in some communities, where 
forbearance with these disturbers of domestic tran- 
quillity had ceased to be a virtue, the citizens assembled 


together in a peaceable and lawful way, interchanged 
views, and devised the only lawful means left them to 
protect themselves and secure the public peace. They 
adopted resolutions, stating publicly and openly their 
grievances, and warning the abolition emissaries to 
desist from intermeddling with their property and their 
rights, and if they could not settle down and become 
peaceable, law-abiding citizens, then to leave the country 
for the country's good. In a few counties of the State 
these public meetings were held, and in no instance was 
there any indignities or outrages committed on the per- 
son or property of any man by such public assemblies 
or by their authority. 



From 1845 to 1861, Continued. 

Responsibility of Ministers, Editors and Publishers — Perversion of 
Facts, a Double Guilt — Public Meetings — Presses Mobbed — Fabius 
Township Meeting in 1854 — Rev. Mr. Sellers — Review of the Pre- 
amble and Resolutions — Meeting at Rochester, Andrew County — 
Three Facts Affirmed of these Meetings — The Best Citizens Con- 
trolled Them — What the Author of the Fabius Township Resolu- 
tions Says — Jackson Seminary in Cape Girardeau County — The 
Jefferson City Land Company and the Great Northern Methodist 
University — The Transaction Transparent — Resolution of Missouri 
Conference of 1858 — A. Bewley — The True Facts in his Case — 
That he was Hanged at Fort Worth, Texas, not for being a Minister 
of the Gospel, but for Complicity in the most Horrible Crimes — 
The Facts Analyzed— The Bailey Letter — Bishop Morris — Dr. 
Elliott — Truth is 'Mighty — Correct "View of the Relation of the M. 
E. Church to the People of Missouri prior to the War. 

When historical facts are perverted, or so detached 
from each other as to destroy their connection, and false 
impressions are made thereby, and bad feelings created 
in the interest of designing men, the moral wrong is 
twofold, and the perpetrators are doubly guilty — false- 
hood reaches its result on the credit of truth, and 
Christ, the truth, is fatally wounded in the house of his 
friends. Ministers of the gospel, editors and publishers 
are accountable to men and God for the most potent of 
all responsibility. They are a savor of life or a savor 
of death, and through them peoples and countries have 
peace or war. 

The uses made by them of the public meetings of 
•citizens held in various parts of this State prior to the 
war did much to aggravate the spirit of animosity be- 

7C L3 


tween the Northern and Southern people in Missouri, 
and to embitter the scenes of war. Some papers were 
so severe upon certain classes of citizens as to provoke 
mob violence, when party feeling was at blood heat, 
and a few printing offices were visited by an insulted 
populace, and type, press, cases and fixtures thrown into 
the streets, or made to settle accounts at the bottom of 
the river, while the editors and publishers were driven 
off. Public meetings were called in man} 7 places by the 
best citizens, to prevent mob violence and promote the 
public tranquillity. This was their object. 

Much has been said in the Northern press and pulpit 
about a meeting of the citizens of Fabius Township, 
Marion county, Mo., held February 18, 1854, just after 
fifteen slaves had walked off to Canada from that town- 
ship. It was alleged by these preachers and papers, 
and the statement is reiterated by Dr. C. Elliott, in his 
book called " Southwestern Methodism/' that the said 
" meeting was held by the citizens of Fabius Tow T nship 
for the purpose of carrying out a scheme to expel Rev. 
Mr. Sellers, a minister of the M. E. Church, from the 
country" — p. 39; and a great hue and cry was raised 
over the persecution of this Mr. Sellers by the aforesaid 
citizens. And all the cheap capital was made out of 
this heroic victim of pro-slavery malice of which the 
utmost torture of the facts was capable. But, after all, 
it is rather surprising to find that neither in the long 
preamble nor in any one of the five resolutions is the 
name of Mr. Sellers so much as once used ; nor do they 
contain so much as a personal allusion to him or any 
other individual man. They refer to a class of men, and 


are directed against a dozen others as much as against 
Mr. Sellers. 

The preamble sets forth, amongst other things, as 
follows: "And, Whereas, there is in our community 
considerable excitement, arising from the belief upon 
the part of many of our citizens that the ministers of 
the Northern division of said Church, who have for 
some time past been preaching in Fabius Township, are 
the representatives of a body whose sentiments upon 
the subject of slavery are decidedly hostile to our in- 
terests as slaveholders and dangerous to our peace ; and 
that the leading object of their mission here is the 
destruction of slavery by the propagation — in any man- 
ner not inconsistent with the safety of their persons — 
of'doctrines calculated to array against the institution 
the weak-minded and fanatical among us, and to create 
discontent, dissatisfaction and insubordination among 
our slaves ; therefore/' &c. 

No one will doubt that these utterances were directed 
against the Northern Methodist preachers as political 
partisans, and not as ministers of the gospel, and that 
the cry of persecution for righteousness' sake failed of 
its sympathy where it failed of the truth. 

The first resolution advises these men to " desist from 
visiting and preaching among us." 

The second is a declaration of rights, and amongst 
them the following : " When the law fails to protect, 
we claim to have the natural right, as a community, to 
resort to the use of such means as will afford us pro- 

The third affirms that t( Northern fanatics have forced 
the question of slavery into all the churches," and 


claims protection under the Constitution and laws of the 
United States government for the institution of slavery 
thus endangered. 

The fourth affirms the unity of Methodist doctrine 
and worship, the validity of the Plan of Separation, 
and "protests against the M. E. Church, JSTorth, sending 
ministers among us, and respectfully requests such 
ministers to make no more appointments in this 

The fifth is as follows : " That, as we are situated con- 
tiguous to Quincy, a city containing some of the vilest 
abolition thieves in the Mississippi Yalley, and as we 
have already suffered so much at the hands of these in- 
cendiaries we regard it as absolutely necessary to the 
protection of our slave interests that wo close our doors 
against abolition and free-soil influences of every 
character and shade, and that we shall, therefore, esteem 
it highly improper for any citizen hereafter to counten- 
ance or encourage the preaching or teaching in this 
community of any other minister or teacher, person or 
persons, the representatives of, or in any way con- 
nected with, any church or churches, any association or 
society, whether religious or political, or of any char- 
acter whatsoever, who have heretofore or shall here- 
after take ground, directly or indirectly, expressly or 
impliedly, against the institution of slavery." 

That resolution is both special and general. It may 
apply to Mr. Sellers, and it may apply to Dr. Elliott, 
and a hundred others, as abolitionists and not ministers, 
or as abolitionists and ministers. 

A similar meeting was held in Rochester, Andrew 
county, in June, 1856, at which resolutions of a similar 


character were passed. In a few other places, too, the 
people assembled peaceably and expressed their disap- 
probation of their course and asked them to desist. 
But whatever may be said to the contrary in partisan 
publications, the page of unerring history will affirm 
three facts of the people of Missouri in these meetings : 

1. That the M. E. Church, South, as such, had nothing 
whatever to do with them; while her members, as 
citizens, were only equally interested and implicated in 
them with the members of other churches. 

2. Whenever these meetings denounced the preach- 
ers of the M. E. Church, North, it was not because 
they were ministers of the gospel, as such, but be- 
cause they abused the privileges of their profession, 
and were secret, active political partisans and abolition 

3. Mob violence was never instigated by these 
meetings, but prevented. No man suffered in person 
or property from them in Missouri. 

In confirmation of this position it is only necessary 
to state the fact that the best class of citizens were the 
prime movers in these public meeting, and, indeed, they 
were only called when it became apparent that the 
peace and safety of the community demanded it; for 
in every community there are passionate, reckless men, 
who are ready to take the law into their own hands 
and vindicate their rights, at whatever danger to the 
public safety. But the best men of the country, and 
those who had the. deepest interest in its peace and 
security, entered the most heartily into these meetings, 
as peace measures, and they now, and will ever, believe 


that such meetings were necessary to prevent mob 
violence and insure the general tranquillity. 

The author of the Fabius Township resolutions, a 
distinguished citizen and lawyer of Marion county, and 
a colonel commanding a regiment of Missouri Militia 
in the Union army during the war, not only anthorizes 
the above statement, but affirms freely that, though he 
had been an anti-slavery man for many years, and 
rejoices in the emancipation of the slaves as he does in 
the restoration of the Union, yet he endorses that 
meeting and those resolutions to-day, and would con- 
scientiously pursue the same course again should a 
similar state of things exist in the community to de- 
mand it. An old citizen of Missouri, a member of no 
church — friendly to all — a Union man from first to last, 
speaking, working and fighting to restore and preserve 
the supremacy of the Federal government, he would 
make affidavit to-day that, to the best of his know- 
ledge, the three facts above stated are fully vindicated 
in the Fabius Township and all similar meetings held 
for similar purposes in Missouri. Thousands of the 
best citizens of the State are ready to affirm the same 
facts and vindicate the good people of Missouri against 
the aspersions of the Northern press. 

Similar meetings to that of Fabius township were 
held in Andrew county, in Independence, Jackson 
county, in Cass county, and perhaps other places, and 
with similar results. In no single instance was the M. 
E. Church, South, implicated. In no single instance 
were the ministers of the M. E. Church, North, mobbed 
or murdered, and in no single instance was mob 
violence against the " vilest abolition thieves " coun- 


seled or countenanced; and with all honest people 
who know the facts the hue and cry raised in certain 
quarters about religious intolerance, mob violence, per- 
secution of ministers, and the martyrdom of innocent 
and holy men is as gratuitous as it is contemptible. 

When the lower House of the Missouri Legislature, 
in February, 1855, refused, by a vote of sixty to thirty- 
six, to charter what was called the Jackson Seminary, 
in Cape Girardeau county, for the Northern Methodists, 
it was not because the representatives of the people 
opposed the establishment of literary institutions, or 
wished to proscribe any form of religion, but because, 
as then stated, the Northern Methodist preachers were 
the emissaries of abolitionism, and by encouraging 
them in establishing institutions in Missouri they 
encouraged their purposes and organization to subvert 
the lawful institutions of the State, which the law- 
makers did not hesitate to affirm would be encouraging 
a cowardly, clandestine treason against the laws and 
government of the State. Four years later the Legis- 
lature refused to charter a university at Jefferson City 
for the Northern Methodists, for the same reason. 

The "Jefferson City Land Company," to encourage 
immigration, build up the city and enhance the private 
fortunes of its members, proposed a liberal grant of 
land to the Northern Methodists, or any others, who 
would build up and endow, with foreign capital, a uni- 
versity at the State Capitol. Though many of the 
members of this Land Company were slaveholders, and 
some of them large slaveholders, they believed that the 
introduction of free labor into the State would greatly 
facilitate the development of her material resources, 


by building railroads and opening her vast beds of 
coal, and lead, and iron to the markets of the world. 
They conceived the idea of inviting and encouraging 
free labor from the Northern States through the active 
agency of the Northern Methodist Church. 

The class of immigrants they desired were opposed 
to negro slavery, and the Northern Methodist Church 
was opposed to negro slavery. Methodist ministers, 
more than any other ministers, were in sympathy with 
the anti-slavery surplus populations of the Northern 
and Eastern States, and could influence them more. 
Hence the alliance. 

The proposition to donate so much land for a uni- 
versity, even at a fictitious value, was a splendid prize 
for that church in Missouri, backed, as it was, by the 
names and influence of some of the first men of the 
State, and located at the seat of political power — the 
State Capitol. 

On the other hand, the promise of the most extensive 
and efficient agency in the world actively working 
throughout the dense populations of the older States to 
put into operation a system of emigration that would 
fill up the State with industrious laborers, absorb the 
surplus lands and enrich the centers of settlement, 
was a tempting premium upon the cupidity of the 
u Jefferson City Land Company," for which they could 
afford to give up their slaves and their former principles. 

The inevitable logic of facts does not compliment 
either the benevolence of the Land Company or the 
religion of the Church. The members of the Land 
Company may have been anti-slavery from principle, 
and their benevolent donation may have been unselfish 


if so, they were unfortunate in their schemes ; if not so, 
they were unskilled in dissimulation. 

They succeeded in this much, at least, in making the 
impression pretty general that their creed was a 
policy, and their policy was simply a question of loss 
and gain. Not that they loved slavery less, but that 
they loved money more ; not that they loved the 
Northern Methodist Church more, but that they could 
use that Church better : while the success of the other 
party resolved itself into a question of deception ; either 
deceiving themselves or deceiving others — possibly 

Residing in Jefferson City at the time, and being 
personally acquainted with each member of the Land 
Company, as well as cognizant of all the facts, the 
author feels justified in thus making transparent the 
shrewd scheme about which so much was said at the 
time. The only motive for this expose is a vindication 
of the truth of history and an analysis of the spirit of 
the times before the war. 

After the failure of the " Jefferson City Land Com- 
pany " and the M. E. Church, North, to build up a 
Cambridge or a Harvard at the State Capitol the Land 
Company subsided, and the Church directed attention 
to other expedients and sought a footing in Missouri 
through other agencies. Public sentiment was against 
them; political prejudices and social barriers denied 
them access to the people. All other religious denom- 
inations were unfriendly to them ; their best preachers 
left them, and either went into the M. E. Church, South, 
or returned home. The better class of Northern immi- 


grants, even from their own Church at home, found it 
to their interest to seek other church connections. 

A suspicion followed them into the domestic, the 
social and the business relations of life, which mani- 
fested too clearly the instinctive sense of moral justice 
and religious fidelity in the public mind to be either 
mistaken or escaped by them as covenant breakers, false 
accusers and clandestine enemies to the property and 
peace of the State. It was natural for them under 
such circumstances to long for redress, and gladly em- 
brace and use every means in their power to effect their 
purpose. They had a lively conception of the horrors 
of slavery, and more skill than conscience in magnify- 
ing them for the Northern press and the Northern 
public. By this means the Northern mind was misled, 
and many a victim of their misrepresentations was 
undeceived only on coming to Missouri and seeing for 
himself the system of slavery, not as it existed in a 
blinded imagination, but as it existed in the homes and 
on the farms of slaveholders ; and abandoning their de- 
ceivers, they vindicated both the system and the people 
from the false impeachment of unscrupulous fanatics. 
This made against them and exasperated them, and 
when they found that they were not sufficiently suc- 
cessful in deceiving the public mind to secure even the 
letters with their bearers from their own Church in the 
Free States, the Missouri Conference, in 1858, uttered 
complaint in the following resolution : 

"Resolved, That we hereby earnestly and affection- 
ately request our brethren of other Conferences, in 
dismissing from their charges, by letter, members who 
intend immigrating to Missouri, that they be at pains to 


inform them that, under the blessing of the great Head 
of the Church, the Methodist Episcopal Church in this 
State is living and thriving, and urge upon them the 
propriety of attaching themselves to our Church here 
immediately on their arrival." 

Several Quarterly Conferences took action on the 
subject, and set forth more fully the grounds of com- 
plaint, which even Dr. Elliott could not escape or over- 
look in his " Southwestern Methodism." 

Perhaps no event in the history of those times 
furnished them more food for comment and capital than 
the hanging of the Eev. Anthony Bewley by the citi- 
zens of Fort Worth, Texas, in September, 1860. Out 
of this event the strongest system of falsehood was 
manufactured by designing men to fire the Northern 
Methodist heart against the Southern people, especially 
the Southern Methodists. 

It was at a time when the country was convulsed 
with political excitement from one end to the other, 
and partisan politics, more or less, colored every report 
of the affair. It was almost impossible at the time to 
get a true history of the event, as the most extravagant 
statements were put in circulation to influence the 
Presidential election the following November. The 
reports in the papers made at the time, and under the 
pressure of the most exciting and embittered political 
campaign known to the history of this country, must 
be received with great allowance and heavy discount. 
After the heat of political excitement, when every 
ballot stood for a thousand bullets, and the fire and 
blood of the civil war that followed have all passed 
away, when passion and prejudice can no longer serve 


the purposes of party, the following facts appear upon 
the surface and bear the imperial image and superscrip- 
tion of truth : 

1. That the Eev. Anthony Bewley, a minister of the 
M. E. Church, North, was hung at Fort Worth, Texas, 
September, 1860. 

2. That the said Bewley had been living in Texas but 
a short time, operating when he could as a minister of 
his Church, but connected with an extensive secret 
organization for the purpose of freeing the slaves, at 
whatever risk to the peace, the property, and the lives 
of citizens. 

3. That he was implicated in a nefarious plot to 
poison wells, fire towns and residences, and, in the 
midst of conflagrations and death, to run off the slaves. 
This fact rests upon much oral and documentary evi- 

4. That a Yigilance Committee had been formed to 
ferret out the plot, capture the guilty parties and bring 
them to justice. 

5. That this Committee had cause to suspect Mr. 
Bewley, ascertaining which he fled the country and 
made his way to Missouri, whither he was pursued by 
them, captured, and taken back to Fort Worth. 

6. That the evidence was so strong against him that 
neither the Yigilance Committee nor the officers of the 
law could protect him from the outraged and enraged 
populace, and about midnight he was taken by force 
and hung. 

7. That if there was a member of the M. E. Church, 
South, on the Yigilance Committee, or in the mob that 
hung him, the evidence does not appear. 


8. Neither the extremest torture of facts nor the most 
distorted construction of collateral circumstances can 
implicate Bishop Pierce, or any other Bishop, minister, 
or member of the M. E. Church, South, as such, in the 
murder of Bewley. 

9. With all due respect to the character of the North- 
ern Methodist publications of this affair, and to Dr. 
Elliott in his " Southwestern Methodism" in particular, 
it may be asked with some degree of consistency, " "Was 
Bishop Ames Bewley's hangman ?" Bishops Janes and 
Ames are responsible for Bewley's appointment to 
Texas ; the latter for his re-appointment, after Bewley 
had made him acquainted with all the facts existing 
there that would prevent his usefulness and endanger 
his life. The Bishop sent him upon a missionary ap- 
propriation of $400, for which he pledged the Missionary 
Society of the Church. Bewley and Willet were sent 
to the Nueces country with specific instructions "not 
to organize societies next summer, but to correspond 
with the Missionary Board." 

10. The evidence upon which he stood convicted in 
the public mind of complicity in the bloody plot to 
poison wells, burn towns, and, through fire and blood 
and insurrection, free the slaves, convicted others also, 
who were not ministers of the M. E. Church. It can 
not be made to appear, therefore, by any legitimate 
construction, that he suffered because he was a minister 
of that Church, but because he was a ringleader in the 
clandestine scheme of fire and murder, that was too 
diabolical to discriminate even in favor of women and 
children, but doomed all indiscriminately who might 
drink of the wells, or be the victims of midnight con- 


the purposes of party, the following facts appear upon 
the surface and bear the imperial image and superscrip- 
tion of truth : 

1. That the Rev. Anthony Bewley, a minister of the 
M. E. Church, North, was hung at Fort Worth, Texas, 
September, 1860. 

2. That the said Bewley had been living in Texas but 
a short time, operating when he could as a minister of 
his Church, but connected with an extensive secret 
organization for the purpose of freeing the slaves, at 
whatever risk to the peace, the property, and the lives 
of citizens. 

3. That he was implicated in a nefarious plot to 
poison wells, fire towns and residences, and, in the 
midst of conflagrations and death, to run off the slaves. 
This fact rests upon much oral and documentary evi- 

4. That a Vigilance Committee had been formed to 
ferret out the plot, capture the guilty parties and bring 
them to justice. 

5. That this Committee had cause to suspect Mr. 
Bewley, ascertaining which he fled the country and 
made his way to Missouri, whither he was pursued by 
them, captured, and taken back to Fort Worth. 

6. That the evidence was so strong against him that 
neither the Yigilance Committee nor the officers of the 
law could protect him from the outraged and enraged 
populace, and about midnight he was taken by force 
and hung. 

7. That if there was a member of the M. E. Church, 
South, on the Yigilance Committee, or in the mob that 
,hung him, the evidence does not appear. 


8. Neither the extremest torture of facts nor the most 
distorted construction of collateral circumstances can 
implicate Bishop Pierce, or any other Bishop, minister, 
or member of the M. E. Church, South, as such, in the 
murder of Bewley. 

9. With all due respect to the character of the North- 
ern Methodist publications of this affair, and to Dr. 
Elliott in his " Southwestern Methodism" in particular, 
it may be asked with some degree of consistency, " Was 
Bishop Ames Bewley's hangman V* Bishops Janes and 
Ames are responsible for Bewley's appointment to 
Texas ; the latter for his re-appointment, after Bewley 
had made him acquainted with all the facts existing 
there that would prevent his usefulness and endanger 
his life. The Bishop sent him upon a missionary ap- 
propriation of $400, for which he pledged the Missionary 
Society of the Church. Bewley and Willet were sent 
to the Nueces country with specific instructions "not 
to organize societies next summer, but to correspond 
with the Missionary Board." 

10. The evidence upon which he stood convicted in 
the public mind of complicity in the bloody plot to 
poison wells, burn towns, and, through fire and blood 
and insurrection, free the slaves, convicted others also, 
who were not ministers of the M. E. Church. It can 
not be made to appear, therefore, by any legitimate 
construction, that he suffered because he was a minister 
of that Church, but because he was a ringleader in the 
clandestine scheme of fire and murder, that was too 
diabolical to discriminate even in favor of women and 
children, but doomed all indiscriminately who might 
drink of the wells, or be the victims of midnight con- 


Mr. Daniel Yicry, Cole, Nugent, Shaw, White, Gilford, 
Ashley, Drake, Meeks, Shultz and Newman. Brother 
Leak, the bearer of this, will take a circuitous route and 
see as many of our colored friends as he can. He also 
recommends a different material to be used about town, 
etc. Our friends sent a very inferior article — they 
emit too much smoke, and do not contain enough 
camphene. They are calculated to get some of our 
friends hurt. I will send a supply when I get home. 

" I will have to reprove you and your co-workers for 
your negligence in sending funds for our agents. But 
few have been compensated for their trouble. Our 
faithful correspondent, Brother "Webber, has received 
but a trifle — not so much as apprentice's wages ; neither 
have Brothers Willet, Mungum and others. You must 
call upon our colored friends for more money. They 
must not expect us to do all. They certainly will give 
every cent if they knew how soon their shackles will 
be broken. My hand is very painful, and I close. 

" Yours truly, W. H. Bailey." 

Should any one be tempted to doubt the genuineness 
of this letter, his attention is directed to what critics 
call internal evidence, to the testimony of witnesses on 
the spot, and the acknowledgment of Bewley himself 
to Mr. Cook, his brother-in-law, and others. 

The disclosure of such a diabolical plot, to be executed 
simultaneously in all parts of the country, with these 
preachers and others in secret league and clandestine 
confederation, extending, perhaps, all over the South, 
and involving a negro insurrection with all the horrible 
crimes of St. Domingo intensified and aggravated a 


thousandfold; could not fail to enrage the populace and 
fire the passions of men to an uncontrollable point. 

Upon such provocation Bewley and Bailey were both 
hung. And with all the efforts made to hold the 
Southern Methodist papers, Bishops and members re- 
sponsible for the crime, no papers and no men more 
deeply regretted and more heartily condemned the act. 

How the venerable Bishop Morris, of the M. E. 
Church, could write — "One of our godly and inoffensive 
ministers, A. Bewley, was hung by a Texan mob, for 
no other crime but connection with the Methodist Epis- 
copal Church," it is difficult to conceive unless we 
assume that he was kept in ignorance of the facts. 
Surely the good Bishop would not suffer his prejudices 
to blind him to the true state of things as they will ever 
stand out in the history of that deplorable event. 

Dr. Elliott says: "Mr. Bewley was suspended upon 
the same limb and tree upon which several negroes and 
a Northern man named Crawford had been hung." 
Were these negroes and this "Northern man named 
Crawford" hung "for no other crime but connection 
with the Methodist Episcopal Church V and yet, so far 
as the facts appear, they were hanged for the same 
crime of which that "godly and inoffensive minister, A. 
Bewley," was convicted. 

"We could excuse the above declaration from the pen 
of Dr. Cartwright or Dr. Elliott ; we could palliate it 
somewhat had it come from Bishop Ames; but from 
Bishop Morris ! the astonishment can scarcely surpass 
the mortification. 

"Truth is mighty and will prevail;" and from all 
the rubbish of falsehood and all the coloring of distorted 


facts the true history of this event will finally reach 
posterity, and vindicate Southern Methodism of every 
aspersion made by a subsidized press, and tear the 
martyr's crown from the victim who expiated his crimes 
upon "the Crawford limb." 

This whole chapter will furnish the reader with a 
correct view of the relation of the M. E. Church, North, 
to the people, the property, the laws and the institutions 
of the State between the division of the Church, in 1844, 
and the breaking out of the civil war, in 1861. But this 
is subordinate to the prime object, which is to show, at 
least, one reason for the conspicuous and efficient agency 
of Northern Methodist preachers in the vindictive per- 
secution of the ministers of the M. E. Church, South, 
the seizure and use of Church property, etc., under the 
constructive association of the latter with slavery, seces- 
sion, rebellion, treason, &c, &c, during the civil war. 
A vindictive spirit put many of them in Missouri and in 
the army during the war. "Vengeance is mine; I will 
repay, saith the Lord." 




Conflict of Sentiment — Party Spirit — New England and Missouri 
Fanatics — Fraternal Blood — "Houses Divided — Three against Two 
and Two against Three " — Organized Armies and Predatory Brig- 
ands — Bull Run, Seven Pines, The Wilderness, Gettysburg and 
Vicksburg Reproduced on a small scale in every County and Cross 
Roads in Missouri — War upon Non-Combatants — The Bloodiest 
Records — Ministers of the Gospel — Their Troubles and Perplex- 
ities — Peculiar Trials and Persecutions — Military Fetters put upon 
the Conscience — Disloyal Prayers and Military Orders. 

The mixed population of Missouri, presenting such, 
diverse types of domestic and social life, and such differ- 
ent casts of political and religious belief, could not fail 
to be turbulent, contentious and almost self-destructive 
in any civil revolution. The people were not homoge- 
neous, and could not unite upon any principles or 
policy, civil or ecclesiastical ; but, on the contrary, each 
shade of political and religious faith stood out upon the 
face of society sharply defined, firmly set and fully 
armed for both offensive and defensive warfare. Party 
leaders were bolder, party spirit ran higher, party 
blood waxed hotter and party strife raged fiercer than 
in any other State. 

When the Northern fanatics adopted a platform and 
announced a line of policy, the Missouri fanatics of the 
same school would not only fall into line, but glory in 
their excess of fanaticism, and push the extremest 
measures of their Northern masters to the most reck- 
less results. Likewise the Southern fire-eaters, so- 


called, could always find in Missouri politicians the 
champions of their extremest measures. Hence it was 
a common "cant" saying among the politicians that 
"when the JSTew England fanatics took snuff the Mis- 
souri fanatics would sneeze/' and, indeed, some times 
the sneezing was done before the snuff was taken, and 
in all that was revolutionary and reckless in politics 
and religion they could "out-herod Herod." 

The extremists, North and South, whether religious 
or political, found the heartiest supporters in Missouri ; 
and that which brought the two sections together in 
organized warfare brought the citizens of the same 
neighborhood in Missouri, and even members of the 
same family, into the sharpest personal conflict. The 
great battles of Bull Eun, Fredericksburg, Yicksburg, the 
"Wilderness, Seven Pines and Gettysburg were repro- 
duced on a limited scale in a thousand places in Mis- 
souri. The brush, the prairie, the glen, the road side 
all over the State sheltered concealed foes, and often 
witnessed the deadliest combats between neighbors and 
brothers. Here "houses were divided, two against 
three and three against two," "a man was set at vari- 
ance with his father, and the daughter against her 
mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in- 
law, and a man's foes were they of his own household." 
There was in many instances a literal fulfillment of the 
prediction that " the brother shall deliver up the brother 
to death, and the father the child, and the children 
shall rise up against their parents and cause them to be 
put to death f and the spirit of contention was too rife 
to confine itself to the hostile armies, or even the law- 
less bands of armed men, who, in the name of one 


party or the other, satiated their diabolical hatred and 
inordinate cupidity by robbery, plunder, pillage and 
depopulation with fire and sword. 

It is no marvel that the most relentless and inhuman 
spirit of the war found encouragement, if not protec- 
tion, and expended its force and fury upon the non- 
combatant and helpless population of Missouri ; for this 
State furnished the bravest men for the armies and the 
most dastardly cowards for "home protection." While 
her brave sons fought and fell upon the fields of honor, 
making the very blood and death of battle illustrious 
by an unchallenged heroism, the warfare at home pre- 
sented scenes of outrage and horror unsurpassed by any- 
thing in the annals of civilized warfare, if, indeed, there 
can be such a thing as civilized warfare, for every 
thing about it is intensely savage. 

Between the "jayhawkers" of Kansas and the "bush- 
whackers " of Missouri some whole counties were plun- 
dered, some were desolated by fire and sword, and some 
were almost depopulated. Widows' homes were pillaged 
and burned, delicate mothers and daughters were cap- 
tured, taken to camp and compelled to cook and wash 
for ruffian bands of armed men, to say nothing of name- 
less indignities and the most horrible crimes. Churches 
and dwellings were seized, converted into barracks for 
soldiers, stables for horses, and often burned to the 
ground in wanton destruction. 

It was often heard in boast that the track of armies, 
or more properly predatory bands, should be lighted 
through entire counties by the glare of burning build- 
ings, and the threat was too often witnessed in all the 
midnight glare of faithful execution by the pallid £nd 


panic-stricken old men, women and children in mid- 
winter. But the heart sickens at the recital, as the 
enlightened conscience revolted then at the reality. 
These statements must suffice to recall the scenes which 
were enacted and the men who educated and then hard- 
ened the public conscience for the crimes committed 
during the war, against God and his chosen ministers 
and church, and for the subsequent legislative proscrip- 
tion of ministers of the gospel, as a class, and Christi- 
anity as an institution. 

The attitude of ministers of the gospel in Missouri 
toward the issues of the war, and how far they partici- 
pated, on the one side or the other, in its fatal scenes 
require notice here. 

At the first, and, indeed, for two years and more after 
the war commenced, the sentiment of the State was so 
equally divided between the contending sections that 
ministers who did not propose to forsake their high 
calling and become active participants in the strife were 
very cautious in their expressions of sympathy. But as 
the Northern or Southern feeling predominated in any 
given locality it became so intolerant as tq demand 
from ministers, as well as all others, an unequivocal 
avowal of sentiment, which always subjected the minister 
to the severest criticism and the most unsparing censure 
when he chanced to think differently from the majority. 
The poople of opposite sentiments denied him access to 
them for good, withdrew their encouragement and sup- 
port, and thus forced him either into the army or into 
exile. The people were so prejudiced and intolerant as 
to believe that a man of opposite political faith was un- 
fitted, by that fact, to minister to them in holy things 


— that sectional sympathy disqualified men for the min- 
istry, and that the men who would preach Christ must 
either dry up the fountains of human sympathy, sur- 
render all the rights of citizenship, or subordinate the 
message of life and salvation to the dictum of the lead- 
ers and representatives of the intolerant spirit of anti- 
Christ that prevailed. In this shape the persecution of 
ministers of the gospel commenced in Missouri with 
the first breaking out of the war. Ministers were 
forced to give up their pulpits and abandon their con- 
gregations where the two were not in sympathy upon 
the issues of the war. 

Many an old man who had been settled for years in 
one pastoral charge, where his children had grown up 
and some of them had died, and where all the tenderest 
and dearest associations known to the sacred relation 
of pastor and people had ripened and matured around 
the fireside, in the sick room, the funeral scene, the 
homes and hearts of grief, and around the bridal and 
sacramental altars, suddenly found himself and his 
family proscribed, maligned and friendless in the very 
homes and hearts in which aforetime their pre-eminence 
was unchallenged. A bitter necessity forced him often 
to give up his home and his pulpit, leave his flock in the 
wilderness and seek protection and support either in 
the army or among strangers. In this way many 
ministers, old and young, were driven to a course which 
they did not elect, and forced into a position which was 
neither of their own choosing nor consistent with their 
sense of ministerial propriety and ministerial obligation. 

And yet for a position forced upon them by the pro- 
scriptive intolerance of their former friends they were 


held responsible, and even severely censured by the 

Many went into both armies — not willingly, but 
by constraint — not of choice, but of necessity — not to 
fight the living with carnal weapons, but to save the 
dying with the power of salvation, and to fight the 
battles of the Lord of Hosts with the spiritual weapons 
that are " mighty through God to the pulling down of 

Some ministers of the gospel entered the army as 
soldiers to fight the battles of the country, and no doubt 
did it conscientiously, believing it to be a high patriotic 
duty. They claimed nothing on the score of their pro- 
fession, but accepted in good faith the issues of war 
and the arbitrament of the sword. Those who survived 
the war claim no undue credit, and those who sacrificed 
their lives for a principle and a cause deserve no 

Those who entered either army voluntarily, either as 
chaplains or soldiers, did it understandingly and, per- 
haps, conscientiously, and accepted the penalty or 
reward due to such a position only. As a soldier the 
preacher claimed no exceptional privileges, and as a 
preacher the soldier claimed no exemption from duty 
on the field or punishment at home. But it is a notorious 
fact that preachers who were in the Southern army as 
soldiers, and who survived the war and returned to 
their homes in Missouri, no matter how gladly, grace- 
fully and loyally they accepted the situation, have not 
met the consideration nor received the treatment in all 
cases meted out to other Confederate soldiers; nor have 
preachers from the Union army in all instances been 


treated as other Federal soldiers who returned from the 
same regiments and to the same counties. Charity at 
least demands the belief that this is due rather to the 
instinctive disapprobation in the public mind of minis- 
ters bearing arms at all than to any studied malicious- 
ness ; and the belief is just as grateful as it is warranted 
by the facts. But if it should fall out in the subsequent 
facts to be presented in this book that a studied malice 
and a methodical madness have done more than the 
anti-war sentiment, then, however ungrateful, we must 
accept the facts as the best interpretation of the anti- 
christian spirit which has exhausted itself upon the 
ministers of the gospel in this State. 

Under this kind of pressure many pastors were with- 
out churches and many churches without pastors ; and, 
in many parts of the State, the churches were disorgan- 
ized and broken up, and the nocks scattered in the 
wilderness, like sheep having no shepherd. It is true, 
some ministers refused to be driven, but remained faith- 
ful to their trust, in the midst of many discouragements, 
much threatening, much murmuring, and not a little 
persecution. Such men, pursuing the even tenor of 
their way, neither turning to the right or left, reviled, 
but reviling not again, " counting not their lives dear 
unto themselves," nor "conferring with flesh and blood," 
deserve the most honorable mention ; and with those 
who know the pressure of sentiment brought to bear 
upon them they will ever be revered as the finest models 
of moral heroism and ministerial fidelity. This class 
of men were not confined to any one church, but have 
their representatives in all the churches which, by con- 
struction, were considered unfriendly to the ruling 


powers of the State. Many of them were faithful men 
of God — men of one work — seeking the souls of men, 
and continuing "steadfast, immovable, always abound- 
ing in the work of the Lord/' through all the storm 
and shock of war; and this, too, at no little cost. 

It was a time of wide-spread iniquity with almost 
all classes. Crime, in every conceivable form, reveled 
without shame, and hesitated at no atrocity. The offi- 
cers of law and the courts were alike powerless to punish 
orime and protect innocence ; " and because iniquity 
did abound the love of many waxed cold," and the 
man of God who could be faithful to the souls of men 
without fear or favor had nerve, courage, faith. 

His home was at the mercy of lawless bands whose 
nameless crimes his last sermon rebuked, and his head 
was a target for the assassin's bullet whose cowardly 
heart felt the sting of conscious guilt under the search- 
ings of God's truth — a guilt, too, of which the minister 
was wholly ignorant. More than one faithful watch- 
man, during those " times that tried men's souls/' went 
from his pulpit to find his home in ashes, his wife and 
children shelterless in the storm, and breadless and 
friendless in the world; and more than one, who did 
not know that they had an enemy in the world, were 
called from their beds at midnight to be shot down like 
dogs, or butchered like hogs in the very presence of 
their families, without warning, without any known 
provocation, and without knowing their murderers. 

Some of the brightest and purest lights of the Church 
went out at midnight — suddenly, appallingly — and their 
"souls were under the altar" many long, weary hours 
before the news of their murder could pass beyond the 


family threshold, and often days before it could even 
reach the family itself. Many of these murders are 
wholly unaccountable upon any other hypothesis than 
that intimated above, as the victims hereafter to be 
named had kept themselves from strife, and had pur- 
sued, with "singleness of heart as unto the Lord," their 
one calling; they had taken neither part nor lot in the 
war, one way or the other, and, indeed, were not all of 
one political faith ; their sympathies were — some for the 
Union and some for the South. 

The men who stood faithful amid the faithless were 
not rash and reckless, but prudent and cautious, as it 
well becomes those who stand up for the truth in the 
midst of a crooked and perverse generation. Some 
ministers, by a prudent, consistent course, ministering 
to all alike, and keeping their political views and sym- 
pathies to themselves, conquered, in a measure, the 
respect and confidence of the leading men of both parties, 
after so long a time, and they were henceforth pretty 
secure. But many had to abandon the ministry for the 
time being and seek a support in other pursuits. 

For some reason, no part of the minister's public 
exercises were looked to with more interest or scrutin- 
ized more closely than his extemporaneous prayers. 
Military officers, partisan leaders, and all men of strong 
sympathies either way, watched with more vigilance 
than devotion the objects, the subjects, the language and 
the sentiment of the extemporaneous prayers of the 
pulpit. They were supposed to show the drift of the 
minister's sympathies and reflect his political sentiments, 
and many people felt much more interested in that than 
in any supplications he might make for the pardon of 


guilt and the salvation of the soul. Post Commanders 
and Provost Marshals would not unfrequently send 
written orders to the officiating minister whose sympa- 
thies were suspected, commanding him to pray for Mr. 
Lincoln, for the flag, for the success of the army in 
crushing out the rebellion, or for the destruction of all 
traitors, or something else of the sort as a test of loyalty. 
And often a minister's bread, his home, his liberty or 
his life were suspended upon and determined by the 
shade of meaning given to a word or phrase in his 
prayer. Tne effort was made to force the conscience at 
the point of the bayonet, and convert the prayer into 
blasphemy, or get from it a pretext for executing a 
malicious purpose already formed, and for which there 
existed neither cause nor occasion. 




Border Slave State — Missouri State Convention — The Last Hope — 
Virginia Convention — Missouri would not Secede — Eights in the 
Union — Disappointment — Anomalous Position — Governor Jackson 
and General Price— Great Excitement — Ministers Embarrassed — 
One False Step Fatal— The Sword vs. Sympathy — Why the Inno- 
cent and Helpless Suffered more in Missouri than Elsewhere — 
Constructive 'Sympathy — Predatory Bands — Hon. Luther J. Glenn 
Commissioner from Georgia — The Effect of the Fall of Fort 
Sumter and President Lincoln's Proclamation — The State Officers, 
Legislature and Militia Adhere South — Assemble at Neosho, Pass 
an Act of Secession, Elect Delegates to the Confederate Congress, 
etc., etc. — Preparations for War — Union vs. Price's Army — •'State 
« Convention Meets Again — Its Acts and Doings — Two State Gov- 
ernments — Sympathy, Property and Plunder— Ministers Again — 
Their Course — Days of Fasting and Prayer — Conferences— Meet- 
ing in St. Charles — Resolutions — Prudence and Prayer — The Press 
— Anti-Christ Abroad — Central Christian Advocate and a few 
Facts — Rev. Mr. Gardner— "Men and Brethren Help "—State 
Convention again in October — The First Oath for Ministers. 

The people of Missouri contemplated the possibilities 
of civil war with the peculiar interests of a border 
State, fearing that when it came the border slavehold- 
ing States would be the main theatre of strife. They 
looked with the deepest solicitude to every plan for the 
peaceful adjustment of the troubles, and not until the 
failure of the "Crittenden Compromise" did they con- 
sider the result inevitable. The much talked of " Border 
States Convention" inspired hope in the less informed, 
but when nothing came of it the last hope perished. 

The Missouri Legislature, by an act, u approved Janu- 
ary 21, 1861," called a State convention "to consider 
the then existing relations between the Government of 


the United States and the people and Government of 
the several States and the Government and people of 
Missouri, and to adopt such measures for vindicating 
the sovereignty of the State and the protection of its 
institutions as shall appear to them to be demanded." 

This convention assembled in Jefferson City February 
28, 1861, and organized and proceeded to the work 
for which it was called. 

Ey the time of its session no less than seven of tho 
Southern States had, by their conventions, adopted 
ordinances of secession, declaring themselves separated 
from the Government of the United States, and organ- 
ized for themselves a distinct national confederation. 
Other States were in a greatly disturbed condition, had 
called State conventions, and would inevitably follow 
their sister Southern States. "War was imminent and 
preparations for it were active — alarming. 

Many still clung to the delusion that the national 
difficulties would be settled without bloodshed, and 
that the very preparations for war would prevent it. 

Virginia, "the mother of Presidents," had a State 
convention then, either in session or about to assemble, 
and the deepest anxiety was felt throughout the whole 
country as to the course that sturdy old State would 
take. It was believed that the action of Missouri and 
Virginia would either prevent or precipitate war, by 
determining the true position of all the border slave 
States; consequently, every act of these conventions, 
and every sentiment uttered in them, was watched and 
weighed with an interest and eagerness never before 
known in the history of the country. 

In Missouri the liveliest interest was taken by all the 


people in the debate on the report of the committee on 
Federal Eolations, and not until it became an ordinance 
of the Convention could the majority of the people in 
the rural districts believe that the State would not 
secede from the Federal Union and unite her fortunes 
with the Southern Confederacy. The simple fact that 
Missouri was a slaveholding State was sufficient in the 
minds of many to determine her Federal relations, or 
at least the policy of secession. Eights in the Union 
were considered possible by the few j rights out of the 
Union were considered the only hope by the many. 

The fact that the State officers and Legislature, elected 
just the fall before, were so nearly unanimous in their 
Southern sympathies that they could, and did, secede in 
a body without disorganization, and without taking the 
State with them, shows how strong must have been the 
Southern feeling at the time of their election. Sectional 
issues were as clearly and distinctly made in the State 
as in the Presidential election, and with a unanimity 
rare in the history of elections the people endorsed 
the pro-slavery party. 

The action of the State convention in February, 1861, 
put the State in an anomalous condition. The effect 
was to detach the State government from the State and 
vacate the several departments of the State government 
without a vacating ordinance. The representatives in 
the State Legislature found themselves without a Consti- 
tution and the people without representatives. It was 
soon evident that neither Governor C. F. Jackson and 
his cabinet nor the majority of the General Assembly 
were in sympathy with the action of the Convention. 
The President of the Convention, Hon. Sterling Price, 


and a respectable minority dissented in their feelings 
from the action of a majority, and conscientiously 
believed that the true interest of the State was in 
political and commercial alliance with the Southern 

Notwithstanding the majority of the people were 
loyal to the Federal Government when the delegates to 
the State Convention were elected, in January, 1861, 
yet the course pursued by Governor Jackson, General 
Price, and those high in authority who were associated 
with them, very greatly unsettled the people of the 
State in their political faith, and produced such general 
excitement amongst all classes, that the greatest fears 
were entertained from the first of an intensity and bit- 
terness of strife in Missouri to which other State-s would 
not be subjected. 

No one not then residing in the State can fully appre- 
ciate the condition of things which this complication of 
public policy developed. Ministers of the gospel and 
other non-combatants were not prepared to meet the 
novel exigencies arising out of such an anomalous state 
of things, in consequence of which many of them were 
placed in very embarrassing circumstances, and not a 
few found themselves forced into positions which their 
cooler and better judgment afterward condemned. The 
pride of some kept them in positions where their indis- 
cretion had placed them, and from which their sober 
judgment would fain extricate them ; and in this way 
many non-combatants were made combatants, and many 
were forced from their families, their homes, their 
property and their country. The people were all un- 
used to civil revolutions and inexperienced in the art 


of adjustment and adaptation. One false step in youth 
may be fatal to all the objects and aims of life, blast all 
its hopes and promises, and cause all its plans and pur- 
poses to miscarry — may be irretrievably disastrous. So 
in the first stages of civil revolutions, a mistake may be 
fatal ; and fatal mistakes are common. Men who were 
not secessionists found themselves fighting for secession, 
and men who were not Union men were forced by a 
combination of circumstances to fight for the Union. 
A man's sword often cut through his sympathies, and 
his sympathies often formed the scabbard for his sword ; 
while the " aiding and abetting " was as often by con- 
straint and coercion as by choice. Even the regimental 
colors of opposing armies did not always and faithfully 
reflect the true sentiment of field and staff, rank and 
file. Sympathy was too confused and policy too un- 
settled to admit of either infallible prescience in choice 
or fidelity in the execution in all cases. Hence many 
good men suffered for principles not their own, and 
sacrificed life and all for a cause with which they were 
not in sympathy. 

Popular excitements are never favorable to deliberate 
prejudgment or right action, and in Missouri more than 
elsewhere the intensity of excitement at this time de- 
throned judgment and defeated action. It is believed 
that much suffering and many of the most shocking 
features of the war could have been prevented by the 
party leaders on both sides in Missouri. 

It is confidently believed that when a true history of 
the war is written, it will appear that, in its reckless- 
ness of life and wantonness of destruction, and in all its 
most shameless, and revolting, and nameless crimes per- 


petrated upon the unoffending, the innocent and the 
helpless, the non-combatant population of Missouri has 
suffered more than any other class of people in any 
State. And much of the sufferings of this class of 
people is justly chargeable to those into whose hands 
the conduct of- the war in this State was first placed. 
The just judgment of posterity and the just retribu- 
tions of eternity will hold to a righteous account- 
ability those who, under whatever pretense, made war 
upon ministers of the gospel, unoffending old men, and 
helpless women and children, dragging them to prison 
and to death, while the pretext for it was found only in 
the hasty expression of sympathy, or the constructive 
connection with one side or the other based upon church 

For instance, Southern Methodists, and Southern 
Baptists, and Southern Presbyterians were by the 
Union men and forces constructively identified with 
secession and rebellion, and put in sympathy with the 
Southern cause. The first from the beginning, the last 
two after the virtual disruption of those respective 

Under the heat of party passion many innocent vic- 
tims suffered the spoiling of their goods, and often the 
loss of life itself, only upon this constructive evidence. 

The principal portions of the State were always held 
by the Union forces, and their subordinate officers and 
independent, predatory bands were either commissioned 
to make war upon these innocent and defenseless people 
or they did it without commission. Certain it is that 
it was done, and done, too, relentlessly and indiscrim- 
inately. How far this state of things i? due to the con- 


verse action of the legitimate State Legislature and the 
legitimate State Convention — the one elected in No- 
vember, I860, and the other elected in January, 1861, 
and both assuming to reflect the will of the people — and 
how far it is due to the course pursued subsequently by 
Governor Jackson, General Price, and the whole State 
Government, with the legislative branch thrown in, 
adhering South, may be determined by others. The 
people of the State, who were not accustomed to a long 
search after remote causes, were free — and many of 
them are still free — to attribute these most inhuman 
features of the war to those who were put in command 
of the Federal forces in this department, the officers and 
men of the State militia, and the "Kansas Bed-legs," 
as they were generally called. 

The first session of the State Convention did very 
little more than discuss and determine the Federal rela- 
tions of the State. The State of Georgia had an 
accredited commissioner present in the person of Hon. 
Luther J. Glenn, a distinguished citizen of that State, 
asking Missouri to secede and join the Southern Con- 
federacy. The Convention heard him respectfully, but, 
after due deliberation, rejected the proposition, and 
resolved to remain in and try to preserve the integrity 
of the Union. 

The Convention also appointed a Commission to at- 
tend the "Border States Convention/' and adjourned 
to await results. 

The people of the State were still in much of a dilemma 
until after the fall of Fort Sumter, the proclamation of 
President Lincoln, and the capture of Camp Jackson. 
Then it was discovered that the State Government, with 


Governor Jackson at the head, was in sympathy with 
the South, and would adhere South in defiance of the 
Convention. It was also discovered that the "Missouri 
State Guard/' which had been raised, officered, armed 
and equipped by the Legislature the previous winter, 
would adhere South, with General Sterling Price in 
command. These revelations excited and alarmed the 
people all over the State, and presented new difficulties 
and embarrassments, which were greatly complicated 
and enhanced by the simultaneous appearance in differ- 
ent parts of the State of the U. S. forces equipped for 
war. Indignation and consternation alternated in the 
public mind, until some definite line of policy was dis- 
closed and the people knew what to expect. 

Governor Jackson fled the capital of the State with 
his officers and army, taking the great seal of State and 
the official records of the several State Departments 
with him, as far as it could be done. He convened the 
Legislature in Neosho, organized and put into operation 
the several Departments of the State Government. "An 
Act of Secession" was passed by the General Assembly; 
delegates were elected to the Confederate Congress; a 
proclamation was issued to the people of Missouri, and 
many other things were done to force the State out of 
the Union and commit her destinies to the fate of the 
Southern cause. This meant war; and the wisest men 
abandoned for ever t'he idea of a peaceful adjustment of 
the difficulties, and prepared for that which neither the 
counsels of the prudent nor the prayers of the good 
could avert. 

For the next few months the preparations for war on 
both sides were active and general. Plows were left 


standing in the furrows ; wheat stood unshocked and 
ungarnered in the fields j mechanics and artisans closed 
their shops and exchanged hammers and saws for guns 
and swords; merchants dismissed their clerks and 
manufacturers their hands, and all prepared for the 
war ; saddleries, foundries and gunsmiths were pressed 
out of measure with work, and the country was ran- 
sacked for mules and horses for service. The policy 
was, "He that hath no sword, let him sell his coat and 
buy one." 

President Lincoln's call upon Governor Jackson for 
the quota of troops from this State to help the Federal 
Government put down insurrection and rebellion had 
been promptly and curtly declined by that official, and 
yet ten times more than the President asked for stood 
ready to respond to the call in defiance of Governor 

The cities and towns along the railroad lines especi- 
ally turned out a heavy surplus population for the 
Union army, while the river towns and rural districts 
supplied men and material for " Price's army," as it 
was familiarly called. 

The state of things thus presented made it necessary 
to convene the State Convention again, which was done 
by the Committee appointed for that purpose at its first 
session. In pursuance of the call of a majority of said 
Committee the State Convention assembled again in 
Jefferson City, July 22, 1861. 

A very different state of things existed now in the 
State, and the Convention had to meet new questions 
and provide for new exigencies. The Governor of the 
State, the president and many members of the Conven- 


tion, and the Legislature that originated and provided 
for the Convention, had all cut themselves loose from 
the Convention and the people represented by the Con- 

The State was virtually without a Governor, and the 
Governor was without a State. The Convention did 
not hesitate in meeting these novel exigencies promptly 
and decidedly. On the seventh day the Convention 
passed "An Ordinance providing for certain Amend- 
ments to the Constitution/' which ordinance vacated 
the offices of Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary 
of State and members of the General Assembly, pro- 
vided for the election of the first three by the Conven- 
tion immediately, and then ordered a general election 
the following November. Hon. Hamilton E. Gamble 
was elected provisional Governor, Hon. Willard P. Hall 
Lieutenant-Governor, and Hon. Mordecai Oliver Secre- 
tary of State. Henceforth the people of the State had 
two State Governments, and the divisions and strifes 
were distinct and complete. 

The effect of this state of things was to unsettle the 
people more than ever, and the lines were clearly 
drawn. The policy of the Federal and State authorities 
was more positive and decided. "He that is not for us 
is against us " was not only of frequent utterance, but 
of dogged application. It was assumed that all men 
had sympathies for one party or the other, and an ex- 
pression of them in any way was sure to provoke the 
hostility of those who assumed the guardianship of 
human sensibilities. Property belonging to persons of 
opposing sympathies was confiscated and appropriated 
to the use of the officers and men taking it ; and at this 


stage of the war the effort was made to force the sym- 
pathies of men through their property. Many a well 
stocked farm was stripped of everything that could be 
earned off and the dwellings burned to the ground, be- 
cause it was said the family had Southern sympathies ; 
and many a helpless man and woman, too, had to prove 
themselves innocent of crimes of which they were as- 
sumed to be guilty to save them from an uncoffined 

Armed brigands came down from Kansas and Iowa, 
and over from Illinois, to plunder and rob the rich 
farmers of Missouri, and many of the poor ones, too, in 
the name of the Union, and to preserve the Constitu- 
tion. They carried away wagons, horses, mules and 
stock of every description, plundered houses of silver 
plate, jewelry, beds and bedding, carpets, clothing of 
men, women and children — even the mementoes of ladies 
and the toys of children — everything that could gratify 
their cupidity or vex and mortify the original owners. 
All this for the preservation of the Union, by enriching 
the houses and pockets of men who cared for no higher 

Ministers of the gospel suffered in common with 
others, especially those of the Southern Methodist 
Church, and others who were suspected of disloyal 
sentiments. Many of them had to "take the spoiling 
of their goods joyfully," or otherwise, and were wholly 
broken up and reduced to penury and want, and yet 
many of them were honestly and earnestly laboring to 
abate the feverish excitement, allay the bitterness of 
feeling and promote "on earth peace and good will 
toward men." 


The Annual Conferences of the M. E. Church, South, 
in the fall of I860, recommended to all Christian people 
the observance of a a day of fasting, humiliation and 
prayer " for the peace of the country and the amicable 
adjustment of existing difficulties. This had been gen- 
erally observed throughout the State the week before 
the Presidential election, and, doubtless, did much good 
in humbling the Church before God, and in directing 
the hearts and faith of the people to the only " refuge 
and strength and present help in time of trouble." 

After actual hostilities had been in progress a little 
more than one month a number of ministers of differ- 
ent churches assembled in St. Charles, Mo., May 21, 
1861, and, after prayer and deliberation, adopted the 
following : 

"Whereas, In the Providence of God our country 
is now involved in a civil war, which has already 
brought upon us many calamities, and still threatens to 
introduce a state of ill will, discord and desolation 
utterly inconsistent with our condition as a Christian 
land; therefore, 

"Resolved, 1. That we meet together on this day in 
the fear of God, and with a firm reliance on his divine 
Providence as a Christian people, communicants of the 
respective churches in this city, to observe such means 
as will at least tend to promote good will among our- 
selves during the continuance of this war. 

" 2. That we regard all war as a sore calamity, con- 
trary to the spirit and teaching of the gospel, and more 
especially a civil war, as revolting to our Christian 
teaching, unnatural, abhorrent to all our Christian 


instincts, and subversive of the cause of Christ, whose 
blessed mission was to establish peace on earth. 

" 3. That, as ministers of the Christian churches, irre- 
spective of our private opinions, we do hereby pledge 
ourselves, one to another, ministers and people, to 
abstain as far as possible from all bitter and exciting 
controversy upon the questions now agitating the public 
mind, but will, each within the sphere of our influence, 
endeavor to promote a spirit of brotherly love, and by 
calm and judicious counsel, animated by the Spirit of 
Christ, our peaceful Master, suppress every act among 
ourselves which may have a tendency to increase the 
present difficulties. 

"4. That we call upon the Christians of our land to 
band together to stay, if possible, the further shedding 
of fraternal blood, etc., etc. 

" 5. That we will not forget our best refuge — prayer 
— and therefore humble ourselves before God and sup- 
plicate our Heavenly Father to quell the madness of tho 
people and put away from us all bitterness, and anger,, 
and clamor, and evil speaking, and animate us with the 
gentle spirit of peace on earth and good will toward 

" 6. That, with trustful resignation and humble faith 
in the strength of the Lord of Hosts, we do cordially 
recommend to all Christian churches to set apart Thurs- 
day, June 6, 1861, as a day of private and public sup- 
plication, with fasting, humiliation and prayer," etc. 

Similar meetings were held in other places to avert 
the calamity of war, or to abate some of its bitterness, 
and promote peace and good will amongst neighbors 
and non-combatants. 


Yery few ministers, comparatively, espoused actively 
the cause of either party, but pursued with a singleness 
of purpose their legitimate calling, ministering to all 
alike, and seeking only to make the gospel the " power 
of God unto salvation." Individual ministers and 
ecclesiastical bodies felt deeply the importance of pru- 
dence, quietness and ministerial fidelity to the Church 
of Jesus Christ, over which the Holy Ghost had made 
them pastors ; that the ministry be not blanW, that the 
•cause of the Master be kept above reproach, and that a 
pure Christianity might always conserve the public 

Notwithstanding the good intentions and laudable 
efforts made by the ministry of Missouri generally to 
promote the public peace, the press of the State, both 
secular and religious, did very much to break the force 
of their well-meant endeavors, and seemed determined 
either to drag the Church into the most ultra partisan 
support of the war, or, in case of failure, to place both 
under the suspicion and surveillance of the military 

The spirit of anti-Christ, which had been increasing 
and spreading for years in Missouri, now assumed a 
boldness and a defiance that hesitated not to use the 
party hatred of religious editors and preachers to make 
a bold advance upon the doctrines and services of those 
who represented a pure, non-political, unsecular Chris- 
tianity. It was not uncommon for the plainest facts to 
be perverted, if, by so doing, the cry of persecution for 
loyalty's sake could be raised and the most reckless 
passions of men could be fired. In this kind of busi- 
ness the Northern Methodist preachers and papers were 


more expert than others, and the hope of wreaking a 
mean vengeance on the M. E. Church, South, supplied 
sufficient motive. Such a declaration should not be 
made unless demanded and supported by the plainest 
facts. Unfortunately they are not wanting, and a few 
only must be selected from the many. 

The Central Christian Advocate, published in St. Louis 
for the M. E. Church, North, and edited by Dr. C. 
Elliott, seized every event that could be tortured into 
an occasion for an inflammatory article against the 
ministers and members of the M. E. Church, South. 

Some time in September, 1860, the Northern Metho- 
dists held a camp meeting not far from Utica, in Living- 
ston county, North Missouri. The preacher in charge 
was one Eev. Mr. Gardner, who had already rendered 
himself obnoxious to the people by intermeddling with 
politics, tampering with slaves and unministerial con- 
duct in the social circle. This camp-meeting was 
broken up on a Monday without service and in great 
confusion. The cause was no matter of conjecture, nor 
of its authenticity were the people permitted to doubt. 

The Rev. Mr. Gardner had, the night before, been 
found in the wrong tent, from which he was summarily 
ejected by the ladies. The public indignation was too 
intense the next day to allow services to be held, and 
the crime of the preacher was made too apparent by the 
separation of a man and wife, the latter of whom had 
made herself rather conspicuous by her great zeal in 
the service of Gardner and the Church. 

The Central Christian Advocate published it as a "great 
outrage," and made the breaking up of that meeting do 
good service in the persecution of the ministers of the 


M. E. Church by the ministers and members of the M. 
E. Church, South. The editor of that paper said so 
much about it that good, honest, reliable men went to 
the place and investigated the matter. It was after- 
ward ventilated through the public prints, to the in- 
finite humiliation of the profession which the man dis- 
graced and the reproach of the cause which he shame- 
lessly belied. 

Many other things of similar character did much good 
service for the party and the Church during the follow- 
ing winter and spring, doubtless designed to manufacture 
prejudice against the people of the State, and especially 
the Southern Methodists. 

The Central, of May 15, 1861, contained the following : 

" Men and Brethren, Help ! 

" One of our preachers, last Sabbath week, some thir- 
teen miles from this city, was struck down, his meeting 
broken up, and members of the M. E. Church, South, 
had oversight of the assault, which was conducted under 
their superintendence. So said Bro. Miller, the preacher, 
and a member of our Church, a Missourian, whose father 
and mother were buried in Missouri, and in which he 
proposes to be buried, whether killed by others or dying 
in the natural way." 

"While the editor should be excused from writing a 
paragraph so awkward and bungling, the real object 
will not be mistaken. It is only necessary to state that 
an intelligent gentleman who was present pronounces 
the whole thing utterly false. The meeting was not 
broken up, the preacher was not knocked down, and 
there was but one member of the M. E. Church, South, 
present at the service, and he left before the trouble, 


which occurred outside of the church after services were 
closed, and grew out of some insulting language used 
by the preacher to a gentleman present, which was re- 
sented with only one slight blow which scarcely reached 
the reverend offender. They were separated before 
any damage was done, and left the Central to do all the 

In this case, as in the Gardner case, the Southern 
Methodists were not implicated ; but for these and many 
other things of which they were wholly innocent they 
had to suffer deeply and grievously, as these pages will 

During the summer of 1861 a number of ministers in 
different portions of the State were robbed of all that 
they possessed of this world's goods, some were driven 
into exile, and some arrested and put into military 
prisons. But more of these hereafter. 

The State Convention reassembled again, October 10, 
1861, in St. Louis, passed several vacating ordinances, 
and provided for the more efficient prosecution of the 
war and the establishment of a more reliable sympathy 
between the State and the Federal Administration. 
Amongst other things it was ordained that all the civil 
officers of the State should take, subscribe and file with 
County Court Clerks an oath of allegiance or loyalty to 
support the Constitution of the United States and of 
the State of Missouri, and not to take up arms against 
the Government of the United States or the Provisional 
Government of this State, nor give aid or comfort to 
the enemies of either, and maintain and support the 
Provisional Government established by the State Con- 
vention of Missouri. This oath of allegiance was 
required of ministers of the gospel, as such. 




Ministers of Peace — Course Pursued by the St. Louis Christian Advo- 
cate — Rev. Dr. M' Anally its Editor — Candid, Truthful, Honest — 
The Cause of its Suppression, and the Imprisonment of the Editor 
— Ministers of the M. E. Church, South, Labor and Pray Earnestly 
for Peace—Days of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer — Ministers 
who became Political Partisans had no use for such days — " Breath- 
ing out Threatening and Slaughter" — Spirit of the Northern 
Methodist Press — False Publications for a Purpose — One Mr. John 
Stearns and the Western Advocate — Glaring Falsehoods — Excite- 
ment in St. Louis and Throughout the State — Persecution of Min- 
isters in Kansas and Reign of Terror along the Border — Rev. W. 
H. Mobly and Rev. John Monroe in Southwest Missouri — Sys- 
tematic Efforts to Break up the M. E. Church, South, and Dis- 
perse her Ministers — Editorial in St. Louis Advocate — The Cen- 
tral Again — Impressions Abroad — Baptists and Presbyterians 
Implicated — " Religion in Missouri" — Missouri Conference at 
G-lasgow — St. Louis Conference at Arrow Rock and Waverly — 
Conference Stampeded by the Rumor of a Gunboat — Author 

That the ministers of the gospel in Missouri did not 
commit themselves to the strife of war, hut sought to 
promote peace and good order in the State, may he 
learned from the frequent counsel given to their con- 
gregations to remain at home, and " as much as lay in 
them live peaceably with all men." 

Many a young man was prevented from going to 
" Price's army/' or any other, by the timely advice of 
these men of God, and many a wife and mother rejoice 
to-day in the life and love of husband and son only 
through the godly admonition of faithful pastors. 
Some few ministers, it is true, were led astray by popu- 


lar excitement, or forced to quit their homes and flocks 
hy causes heretofore mentioned, and then they preached 
privately what they practiced publicly. But such cases 
were too rare to involve the whole ministry as a class, 
even by the weakest implication. Neither were the 
ministers of the gospel as a whole, nor the ministers 
of any one Church in Missouri, disloyal to the Govern- 
ment of the United States or the Provisional Govern- 
ment of this State. But the very Churches and minis- 
ters that had to suffer the most direful penalties, in the 
destruction of property, the persecution, imprisonment 
and murder of ministers in the subsequent years of the 
war, were now doing more than any other in the State 
to prevent the war and promote the public peace and 

The St. Louis Christian Advocate, edited by the Bev. 
D. B. M' Anally, D. D., contained a series of very able 
editorials, running through April and a part of May, 
1861, on « The Times/' " The Duty of Christian Men," 
" The Time for Prayer/' " To the Ministers and Members 
of the M. E. Church, South, in Missouri and Kansas," 
" The Times — A Word to our Patrons and Friends," and 
kindred topics, in which the people were warned of the 
character of the danger that threatened, advised to 
remain at home, cultivate their lands and pursue the 
avocations of peace and piety in the fear of God, as the 
best means of promoting good order in the State, and 
at least mitigating the horrors of war. 

That paper was candid and earnest in warning the 
public of the magnitude of the rebellion and the un- 
precedented unanimity and courage of the Southern 

people, and when the Northern press generally repre- 


sented the boasted strength of the rebellion as too puer- 
*ile and insignificant to involve the National Govern- 
ment in any serious trouble or protracted war, that 
paper sought truthfully and conscientiously to disabuse 
the public mind, and thereby prevent the many dis- 
astrous blunders committed by an underestimate of the 
military resources and strength of the South. 

How much of suffering might have been prevented, 
and how many thousands of valuable lives might have 
been spared to the country, to say nothing of the mil- 
lions of treasure, had the advice of that paper been 
taken and the timely warnings of its honored editor 
been heeded. But, like all gratuitous counsel that is 
unpalatable, because truthful, it was contemned, the 
motive of its author suspected, and the existence of its 
medium considered dangerous. 

Yery many of the religious papers of the border 
States had already been suspended, and the continuance 
of this one was a doubtful problem for many months 
before its suppression. 

Dr. M'Anally's ideas of right and wrong, of truth 
and error, of justice and righteousness, were derived 
from the old standards. He had no patience with the 
new standards of virtue that grew out of party fan- 
aticism and war expediencies; new fangled notions, dis- 
simulations, prevarication and moral travestie "he 
could not away with." He had not so learned the 
responsibilities of public journalism, and hence his 
simple-hearted appreciation of right led him to expose 
the wrong wherever it existed. His honesty required 
him to denounce the wide-spread dishonesty of the 
times. His simple love of truth caused him to make 


honest and truthful reports of the " Kews of the Week " 
according to the actual facts, without reference to the 
interest of this party or that party, this army or that, 
this commanding officer or that. In this his paper pre- 
sented such a contrast with the press generally that it 
was sought and read by thousands of both parties, and 
accepted by the unprejudiced as the most reliable paper 
then published. 

But because it was truthful, and honest, and candid, 
and popular, and reliable, it was pronounced disloyal 
and dangerous ; and because it would not serve the cause 
of cruelty, confiscation, conflagration, desolation and 
destruction, and with the venom of a viper hound on 
the barbarous hordes with fire and sword to the com- 
mission of the foulest deeds of war; nor with sancti- 
monious hypocrisy sanctify the implements and instru- 
ments of blood and death, and canonize the vilest 
thieves, and robbers, and murderers; for these reasons 
the paper was set down by the enemies of the M. E. 
Church, South, as in the interest of treason and rebel- 
lion, and by them the military authorities were induced 
to suppress the paper and arrest and imprison its editor. 
Of his arrest and long confinement in the Myrtle 
Street Military Prison, St. Louis, the reader will be 
more fully informed hereafter. 

That the ministers of the M. E. Church, South, who 
suffered more than others during the war in Missouri, 
did not provoke the strife nor enhance its malignity, 
but, on the contrary, labored earnestly and prayed fer- 
vently for the return of peace to our distracted country, 
take the following from the St. Louis Christian Advocate, 
of June 13, 1861: 

148 martyrdom in missouri. 

"Fasting and Prayer. 

" To the Ministers and Members of the M. E. Church, 
South, in the Missouri and St. Louis Conferences. 

"Dear Brethren and Sisters: Whereas, our once 
happy and prosperous country is now involved in the 
calamities of civil war, which threatens ruin to all our 
cherished hopes and interests; and whereas, God 
alone, in the exercise of his sovereign and gracious dis- 
pensations, can avert the terrible evil; and as he has 
promised to be inquired of by those that fear him, and 
to interpose for those who reverently and submissively 
supplicate his mercy and seek his Divine interposition, 
it therefore becomes to every Christian community both 
a high privilege and a solemn duty, in such times of 
serious and alarming trials, humbly and reverently to 
prostrate themselves before the mercy seat and sup- 
plicate that aid and deliverance which God only can 

"And, as I have been requested by many ministers 
and laymen of both Conferences (in view of my seni- 
ority as a minister) to designate and recommend a day 
of fasting and prayer, I would, therefore, most respect- 
fully recommend that Wednesday, the third day of July, 
be set apart and observed for this solemn purpose, and 
that appropriate religious services be held in all our 
places of worship ; and, in accordance with the expressed 
wishes of many, and, as I think, in accordance with 
manifest propriety, I tender most cordially, in behalf 
of the whole Church, an invitation to all Christian 
people of the State to unite with us on that day, humbly 
and devoutly to supplicate, in behalf of our common 


country, that God, who can turn the hearts of men as 

the streams in the south, would forgive our sins and in 

his merciful providence hasten the return of peace to 

our country — our entire country. 

" Andrew Monroe. 
"Fayette, Mo., June 5, 1861. 

"The undersigned do most cordially approve the 
above proposition, and earnestly recommend its observ- 
ance throughout the State. 

"Joseph Boyle, 

"E. M. Marvin, 
"H. S. Watts, 


"St Louis, Mo., June 12, 1861. 

In compliance with this recommendation the churches 
of the State were generally well filled with devout wor- 
shipers, and the prayers of tens of thousands of earnest 
Christians ascended to the Lord of Hosts that his anger 
might be turned away, that "our country — our whole 
country" — might be spared the further calamities of war, 
and that "we might lead a quiet and peaceable life in 
all godliness and honesty." 

These public calls to " humiliation, supplication and 
prayer" were frequent in occurrence and general and 
fervent in response; and the unpolitical ministry in 
those days presented a spectacle of touching moral 
sublimity, in their fidelity to the Church and their un- 
selfish devotion to the cause of peace and righteousness 
in the midst of universal strife and war, that deserved 
a higher consideration and a better fate, while it pre- 
pared them for the scenes of suffering and the thrones 
of martyrdom that yet awaited them in the not distant 


It has not escaped the observant, however, that the 
ministers who committed themselves and their pulpits 
to the purposes and prosecution of the war had more 
days of feasting than fasting; more seasons of glorifica- 
cation than humiliation; more days of thanksgiving 
than supplication ; more banners and bonfires than 
confessions of sin and prayers for peace. If any of 
them observed a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer 
in the proper spirit, during the whole war in Missouri, 
the fact has wholly escaped the author's mind. Their 
prayers, for the most part, consisted in " breathing out 
threatening^ and slaughter," and in inflaming the dan- 
gerous passions of men by the most unblushing blas- 
phemies and the most envenomed imprecations. 

The scenes and services which dishonored the gospel 
and disgraced the pulpits and those who occupied them 
in certain quarters during the war can not now be re- 
called without the most painful sense of humiliation and 
shame. It would be an outrage upon public decency 
and taste to reproduce even the best specimens of them 
in these pages. AYe have oblivion for the facts and 
pity for the fanatics; and if a faithful record of the sad 
history we have made should require any further allu- 
sion to such scenes, it will be made with mingled shame 
and commisseration. 

While the ministers in Missouri were striving man- 
fully and humbly to allay the bitterness of strife by 
frequent calls to public humiliation and prayer, and by 
wise and godly counsels of peace and quietness, design- 
ing men who had left the State, and some even who 
remained in the State, were at work, through the differ- 
ent media of reaching the public mind, trying to arouse 


the suspicions and inflame the passions of those in power 
against the only real u peace-makers" in the State. 
Specimen extracts have already been given from the 
Central Advocate of Missouri, and it may not be out of 
place to insert one from the Western Christian Advocate, 
of Cincinnati, of June 12, 1861 : 

" ' Methodist Episcopal Church, South/ Missouri. 

" We had a call from Mr. John Stearns, late a resident 
of Miller county, Mo. He was formerly of Pennsyl- 
vania, but for some years had resided in Missouri, and 
has been a member of the M. E. Church over thirty-five 
years. He gave us the names of two of his neighbors 
who had been hung for their Union sentiments, and for 
being members of the ' so-called ' Northern Methodist 
Church. The leaders of the mob hanging these men 
were members of the M. E. Church, South. Mr. Stearns 
says further that he was informed through a friend that 
he himself was to be hung Saturday, June 1st, but that 
he defeated the attempt by escaping the previous night. 
The man who led on the mob of Jefferson City in 
riddling the Methodist Episcopal Church there, of which 
the expatriated Eev. Z. S. Weller was pastor, was the 
son of Claiborne Jackson, the Governor of Missouri. 
Mr. Stearns tells us that but for the M. E. Church, 
South, there would be no secessionism in the State. The 
preachers and members of that denomination see that 
the triumph of Unionism is their death knell, and hence 
the fury and despair which characterize their fight." 

It will not be unkind to say now that such stories 
were manufactured to order and published for effect. 
The war has come and gone, and passion and prejudice 


have been measurably displaced by peace and order; 
and yet, to this day, the hanging of two of Mr. Stearns' 
neighbors, in Miller county, Mo., has only come to the 
knowledge of the people of Missouri through the Western 
Christian Advocate, and upon the authority of one Mr. 
Stearns, " formerly of Pennsylvania." 

But that this assertion is not made without good 
authority, read the following extracts from two letters, 
as only a sample of many others on hand : 

" Pleasant Mount, Miller Co., Mo., July 4, '61. 

" Mr. Editor : I see in your issue of June 20th a state- 
ment from one Mr. John Stearns, who says he has been 
a citizen of Miller county for some years, and that two 
of his neighbors were hung for their Union sentiments, 
and for being members of the M. E. Church, North ; 
that he himself barely made his escape by starting the 
night before. 

"Now, as to the hanging part, Mr. Stearns has grossly 
misrepresented the peoj)le of Miller county. There has 
never been any person hung in the bounds of the 
county, under any pretext whatever, much less for their 
political or religious creed ; and Mr. Stearns knew when 
he made the statement that it was false. In fact, I 
doubt whether there has ever been such a man in Miller 
county, at least I have found no one who has ever 
known such a man, and I have inquired of the Sheriff 
of the county, and the Clerk of the County Court, as 
well as of a number of citizens who have lived here ever 
since before Miller county was organized, and none of 
them have ever known such a man as John Stearns ; and 
if it were necessary I could get hundreds of the most re- 


liable men of this county to bear testimony to the truth 
of the above, &c, &c. 

"(Signed) Thomas J. Smith." 

Another letter, written by Wm. M. Lumpkin, July 2, 
1861, says : 

"I was born and raised in this (Miller) county, and 
can safely say there never was a man hung in this 
county to my knowledge. I have served a good time 
in this county in the capacity of Deputy Circuit and 
County Clerk, and County School Commissioner, and 
I have never heard of such a man before as Mr. John 
Stearns," &c. 

The statements were denied at the time, and means in- 
stituted to ascertain their truth or falsity, but up to this 
time no information of such hanging has come to light. 
But the article served its purpose, and, like one that 
appeared a short time before in the New York papers, 
about the hanging of a Eev. Mr. White near St. Charles, 
Mo., where no such man had ever been seen, known, or 
heard of, and many others of a similar style, character 
and purpose, it passed away much sooner than the pre- 
judices and passions it excited, and which were left to 
expend their fury upon those who made no " fight," 
and whose " death knell " was not heard in the triumph 
of Unionism, except only as it was uttered from the 
pulpits and pens of "false prophets." 

About this time there was intense excitement in St. 
Louis, especially over the capture of Camp Jackson, 
the burning of bridges on the Pacific Railroad, and the 
retreat of Governor Jackson and General Price from 
Jefferson City. This excitement was greatly increased 


by the soldiers firing into promiscuous crowds of citizens 
along the streets, in which a number of citizens, with 
some women and children, were killed and wounded; 
and also the battle of Boonville, in which it was reported 
in the Missouri State Journal and other papers that Gen. 
Lyon's forces had been badly cut to pieces, but which 
the knowledge of the facts afterward modified to some 
extent. The small engagement between the Federal and 
State forces at Eock Creek, near Independence, ~Mo., 
about the same time, added somewhat to the general 
excitement, which by this time had spread throughout 
the State. 

"Along the border of Kansas the people of the State 
were kept in constant alarm by the depredations of 
what were called at that time "Kansas Jayhawkers." 
Many families were robbed, houses burned and preach- 
ers forced to fly for safety, as the following extract from 
a letter to the St. Louis Christian Advocate, from the 
Rev. N. Scarritt, a highly esteemed minister and a pre- 
siding elder then laboring in Kansas, will show : 

"In addition to this, some of our preachers in the 
southern portion of the Conference have been compelled 
to quit the field and leave their work for the present, on 
account of the violence of civil strife so prevalent in 
that section. 

" Our preachers there have taken no part in the 
political questions that are involving the country in so 
much trouble. They have been peaceable, law-abiding 
citizens, leaving politics alone, and devoting themselves 
exclusively to the peaceable work of preaching the 
peace-making gospel of the Prince of peace. 

"Yet, though this has been their known and acknowl- 


edged character, it has not been sufficient to protect 
them from the rage of fanaticism and outlawed violence. 
Several of them have had their horses stolen from them 
by the Jayhawkers. Repeated threats of hanging, 
shooting, &c, have been made against them by the jay- 
hawking tribe, though no attempt, so far as we know, 
has been made in the form of any overt act to execute 
these threats." 

In Southwest Missouri several of the ministers of the 
M. E. Church, South, were robbed and otherwise mal- 
treated, amongst them Rev. "W. H. Mobley, now gone 
to rest, and Rev. John Monroe, one of the oldest minis- 
ters of any Church in Missouri. These occurrences 
began to attract attention by their frequency and 
atrocity, and it was soon discovered that a systematic 
effort was being made to so annoy, and harass, and 
persecute the Southern Methodist ministers that they 
would have to abandon the State, and leave their 
churches and flocks to be seized and absorbed by others. 

The following editorial in the St. Louis Christian Advo- 
cate, of July 25th, indicates but too plainly the condi- 
tion of things then being forced upon us at this early 
period of the war : 

" Traveling Preachers.— -TV "e are sad, sad indeed, when 
we think of the privations and sufferings of many of 
the traveling preachers of our Church in Missouri dur- 
ing these troublous times. The treatment some of them 
have received has been severe, not to say cruel. Bad 
men have sought to implicate them in measures with 
which they had nothing to do, and have them annoyed 
and distressed merely that private piques and personal 
animosities might be gratified. A number have literally 


been driven from their work, either by the malice of 
their enemies or by pressing want. Some, it may be, 
have acted imprudently — have become partisans in the 
strifes now going on, and thus, in part at least, were 
the authors of their own troubles. "We have, at pre- 
sent, only a word to say. We hope that the preachers 
will remain at their work as generally as possible, that 
they will devote themselves to their work to the fullest 
possible extent, reproving, exhorting, comforting, etc., 
with all long suffering and kindness. In these times 
we must all suffer, more or less, and let us suffer with 
our people, and be sure that we suffer for righteousness' 
sake and not as evil-doers. God rules/and they that 
serve him in spirit and in truth shall find him a very 
present help in time of trouble/' 

The purpose to destroy the M. E. Church, South, in 
Missouri, was not only formed, but" expressed also, and 
the Northern Methodist papers were then earnestly en- 
gaged in the effort to convince those in authority, and 
to fasten it upon the public mind, that but for the South- 
ern Methodists treason and rebellion could not exist in 
Missouri. Such declarations as the following, 'taken 
from the Central Christian Advocate, of August 7, '61, 
were of weekly publication in the most conspicuous 
places in their papers, and industriously circulated in 
the centres of military power : 

"A 'Ruined Church. — An excellent brother, for the 
present a local elder of the M. E. Church, South, in 
Missouri, under date of July 27th, writes to us as fol- 
lows : ' I shall endeavor to advance the interests of the 
Central; I have no Christian fellowship with traitors 
and treason. Dr. M' Anally has ruined the Church in 


this country, and I hope to see the time when a loyal 
Church will occupy this entire ground/ " 

This, also, may be of a piece with the Gardner, the 
Miller and the Stearns stories, but it was none the less 
effective in its object on that account; and the license 
given to bad men to commit worse crimes by such pub- 
lications was only equaled by the malicious motive that 
conceived it, and its influence upon the army, officers 
and men. 

To further show what impressions were made at 
home and abroad upon the public mind by false publi- 
cations, let the following item, taken from the Phila- 
delphia Banner of the Covenant, of nearly the same date, 
be noted : 

"Religion in Missouri. — The Baptists in Missouri, the 
largest denomination, are about unanimous in favor of 
secession. The M. E. Church, South, the same, with 
but few exceptions. The Presbyterians, the third in 
numbers, are about equally divided. The M. E. Church, 
North, the fourth in size, are unanimous and earnest in 
favor of the Union. Half of their membership and 
one-third of their ministers have been driven from the 

But for the exceptions in the M. E. Church, South, 
another paragraph in the same paper would reveal the 
author of the above information. It is as follows : 

"Kev. Mr. Shumate, of Missouri, having been ap- 
pointed to the chaplaincy of a regiment, asked leave of 
absence for a few days, made a flying visit to Indiana, 
and returned with two companies which he had re- 
cruited for the regiment." 

The papers were filled with statements designed to 


prejudice the authorities and the public against the 
old ministers of Missouri, which had much to do in 
bringing upon the ministry and Church the peculiar 
character of persecution which distinguishes the history 
of those times. Henceforth the Baptist ministers of 
the Stato will have to share largely in the persecutions 
and trials of their less fortunate Southern Methodist 
brethren, and not a few of the Presbyterian ministers 
were implicated in the same way, and had to sufTer for 
being in Missouri. 

The Missouri Annual Conference, M. E. Church, South, 
had been appointed to meet in Hannibal, Mo., in Sep- 
tember, 1861, but on account of the general excitement 
in that portion of the State, and the deep prejudices 
created by false statements against the ministers of that 
Church throughout the State, it was deemed by them 
unsafe to attempt to hold the Conference session in 
Hannibal, and it was removed to Glasgow, on the Mis- 
souri river. 

This Conference, by formal resolution, deprecated 
the calamities of civil war, and affirmed its loyalty to 
the Government of the United States and the Pro- 
visional Government of Missouri, attended to its regular 
minute business, with Eev. W. G. Caples presiding in 
the absence of a bishop, made the appointments of the 
preachers and separated to their several fields of labor, 
all with as much dignity, quietness and decorum as ever 
characterized a body of censecrated divines. Many of 
them met in Conference, worshiped and wept together 
for the last time. Before they could convene again a 
number of them had ceased at once to suffer and to live, 
and had gone to mingle with the blood- washed and 
white-robed beyond the flood. 


The parting scenes of the preachers at this Confer- 
ence were truly touching and solemn. Many of them 
seemed to be impressed that the trying' scenes through 
which they were yet to pass would not only " try men's 
souls/' but consign many of their bodies to the grave 
and send their souls "under the altar." What names 
were on the "death roll " no one could divine, and yet 
the general fact was scarcely concealed from them, 
"that in every city bonds and afflictions awaited them/' 

The St. Louis Annual Conference had been appointed 
to meet in Warrensburg, but for the same reasons that 
influenced the Missouri brethren to go to Glasgow the 
St. Louis Conference session was moved to Arrow Rock, 
Saline county. The Conference convened September 
25, 1861. After organizing, with D. A. Leeper in the 
Chair and W. M. Prottsman Secretary, and transact- 
ing some little committee business, the Conference ad- 
journed to Waverly, believing that more preachers 
would meet them there, and that they would be less 
likely to be disturbed in their deliberations. How 
much the report of a gunboat coming up the Missouri 
river, or a military transport with reinforcements for 
the army at Lexington, influenced this movement to 
Waverly, statements differ. A Methodist Conference 
stampeded by a rumor, and fleeing for very life across 
a whole county, scattering Bibles, hymn books and 
saddle-bags in their flight, was quite a novelty; and 
whether it occurred or not the report of it was enough 
for the malicious on the one hand and the mischievous 
on the other. The very thought of it was so novel and 
ridiculous that it inspired some youthful poet to im- 
mortalize the scene in song, and his failure was due 


rather to the absence of the genuine muse than to the 
existence of some basis and a persistent attempt at 
clever rhyme. 

The author himself was spared the novelty and noto- 
riety of the occasion only by the untimely interference 
of a small detachment of Colonel iNugent's command, 
then posted at Kansas City. 

I had announced on Sabbath to my congregation that 
I would start to Conference the next day, stating where 
it would be held, and about how long I expected to be 

On Monday morning early, in company with Mr. H. B. 
Conwell, a brother-in-law and a steward in the Church, 
I started for Conference. Just as we were passing out 
of the city on the main road to Independence we dis- 
covered a small squad of soldiers riding slowly about 
half a mile ahead of us. To avoid molestation and de- 
tention we took a by-road that would intersect the 
"Westport and Independence road, on reaching which 
we discovered the soldiers still ahead of us, and began 
at once to conjecture some designs upon us. They had 
halted by a peach orchard and were helping themselves 
when we drove up. They very politely gave us of their 
peaches and requested us not to go ahead of them. 

We traveled on behind them for some distance, when 
the officer in command stopped to talk with a farmer by 
the road side who knew me well, and asked when we 
drove up if I was on my way to Conference. 

"What Conference?" asked the officer. 

" The Conference of the M. E. Church, South, at Ar- 
row Kock," I replied, quite indifferently. 

" What, that secesh concern ? I'll see to that. No 


such body of traitors can meet in this State." And with 
the last words he spurred his horse up with his com- 
mand and detailed four men to put us under arrest and 
guard us to Independence. 

With "two behind and two before" we were ordered 
to "drive." Thus we traveled until we reached Eock 
Creek, two miles from Independence, when an orderly 
was sent back who dismounted and ordered us to 

"I want you men to get out of this," he said. 

"For what," I asked, mildly protesting against the 

" I want to send this buggy and horse back to camp," 
he replied. " We have use for such things sometimes 
to ride our wives and children out a little." 

"Where is your camp ?" was asked by Mr. Conwell, 
at the same time declaring that the horse and buggy 
belonged to him. And when informed that their camp 
was in Kansas City, at Col. Nugent' s headquarters, he 
asked — 

" Then why can't you send us back to Kansas City in 
the buggy, under guard if you like ? We live in Kansas 

""No," said he; "no use talking. If you are loyal 
men you can afford to walk ten miles for the sake of 
the Government ; and if you are disloyal, we are not 
round hauling rebels. Get out !" 

We did not wait for another invitation, but got out ; 

and when we found that it was not us but our's they 

wanted we felt somewhat relieved, took a luncheon to 

stay the appetite, and then the roof of the stage an hour 

after, which safely landed us back whence we started. 


Mr. Conwell soon obtained his horse and buggy, and 
a message to me, that if I would stay at home and at- 
tend to my own business I would not be molested ; but 
it would not be well for me to make another attempt to 
go to Conference. 

The preachers in the city of St. Louis and in South- 
east Missouri could not reach the Conference. The 
session was short, the minute business only receiving 
attention, and the presiding elders left to make the best 
disposition of the preachers in their respective districts 
that the circumstances would allow. The preachers 
separated to their several homes and fields of labor with 
about the same feelings and in about the same spirit 
that characterized the parting scenes at Glasgow two 
weeks before. Many of them to pass through scenes 
of trial, persecution, suffering, desolation, blood, and 
fire, and death, ere another Conference could be held. 

Looking back now upon those perilous times, it is 
H marvelous in our eyes " how that these faithful men of 
God "endured hardness as good soldiers," "not counting 
their lives dear unto themselves so that they might 
finish their course with joy, and the ministry which they 
had received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of 
the grace of God." The history of the Church fur- 
nishes few such instances of moral heroism as these men 
exhibited, even in that early period of the war troubles; 
and when, afterward, the Baptists, Presbyterians and 
Catholic priests became our fellow-sufferers, and aug- 
mented our moral strength, the moral heroism was 
complete, sublime. The spirit of consecration to Christ 
and his cause was equal to the extremest perils of pro- 
perty, health and life. 





Indiscriminate Robbery, Pillage, Arson and Murder — Banditti and 
Revenge — Black-Mail and Espionage — Panic, Depopulation and 
Plunder — Demoralization — Virtue Sacrificed — Some who Would 
not Bow the Knee to Moloch — God had an Altar and Israel a 
Priest — Persecution, Arrest and Imprisonment of Revs. J. Ditzler, 
J. B. H. Wooldridge and D. J. Marquis — Many others Suffered 
in Like Manner — Rev. James Fewel Arrested, Cruelly Treated, 
and Died from the Effects of Inhuman Treatment, aged Seventy- 
two Years — Many such Victims — The True Office and Work of 
the Ministry — Its Spirit and Mission — Any Departure Unsettles 
the Public Mind — A Sad Day for the Country, Church and State 
— Relations and Dependencies — Three Thousand and Fifty New 
England Clergymen Before Congress — A Solemn Protest and its 
Effects — Then and Now — Ecclesiastical Bodies on the "State of 
the Country" — Ecclesiastical Bummers — A Settled Policy to 
Drive the Old Ministers out of the State — General Halleck's 

The events of 1861 had a very decided moral effect 
upon the public mind. Several severe battles were 
fought in the State during the year, and the armies and 
armed bodies of men were largely recruited. Men 
who, at the first, had no thought of entering either 
army found themselves forced, by circumstances, to 
take up arms in what was, by construction, called self- 
defense — that is, by constant annoyance from armed 
men, by harassing fears, from threats and rumors of 
mischief to person and property, frequent arrests, pil- 
lage, plunder, etc., many a peaceable, quiet, orderly citi- 
zen was tormented into the necessity of taking up arms. 

Armed bands appeared in every part of the State — 


some on one side and some on the other, some with 
authority and some without, but all subsisting as they 
could, and but few caring how. These bands, many of 
which were irresponsible brigands and marauders, 
usually "foraged" on the citizens whose sympathies 
were on the opposite side. They did not always stop 
at the necessary supplies for subsistence, but were rob- 
bers of houses, and many of them indiscriminate and 
general thieves, taking horses, mules, cattle, wagons, 
corn, hay, flour, bacon, fruit, blankets, quilts, feather 
beds, carpets, clothing of every kind, from elegant 
silks, furs and shawls to children's shoes and toys ; 
money, watches and jewelry were often taken from the 
persons of ladies. These highwaymen would often put 
the torch to dwelling houses at night and take a fiendish 
pleasure in seeing the awakened inmates make their 
escape or perish in the flames. Men were shot down by 
them on the highway, in the fields, the woods and at 
the doors of their houses as though life was of little 
value, and its appreciation was about equal to the effect 
of one bootless, midnight murder upon the great ques- 
tion of Union or division. At all events, after the 
battle of Lexington, September 21, 1861, and the rapid 
movements of armies which followed, human life was at 
the caprice of the armed banditti that multiplied so 
rapidly over the State. 

Many defenseless citizens suffered such indignities 
and insults from them, in addition to the loss of all they 
had on earth, that they fled to the army for protection, 
or to the brush and banded together for revenge. Men, 
whose houses were destroyed, and whose wives, and 
daughters, and sisters had been worse than insulted by 


inhuman ruffians, swore the direst vengeance, and with 
unsparing recklessness scattered desolation and death 
in their tortuous track. For their deeds military com- 
manders of posts would hold defenseless communities 
responsible, levy black-mail upon them, sometimes to 
the full value of their property, and institute a system 
of espionage that would put an eavesdropper under 
nearly every man's window and a detective in every 
social circle and public assembly. Property and life 
were thus put at the mercy of unprincipled detectives 
and spies, selected often from the lowest and most un- 
scrupulous classes of men and women. "With such a 
system of military despotism no man's life was safe, 
and indeed many men were accused, arrested, impris- 
oned, tried, convicted and put to death without ever 
knowing the charges against them. 

It is not difficult to conjecture the effect of this state 
of things upon the public mind. To say that the people 
in some whole counties along the borders of Iowa and 
Kansas were seized with panic and consternation is not 
more than the truth. Men and families broke up, and 
taking what they could with convenience and safety fled 
for life and protection, some North, some South, some 
to Canada, some to California, some to the army, some 
to the large cities, and some to the brush. Some men 
ordered and some frightened their neighbors away, and 
then, to furnish them means to travel, bought their 
stock and lands at a nominal price — in some instances 
for a mere song. What a farmer, or mechanic, or 
merchant left behind in his flight was seized as lawful 
prey by the first that found it and appropriated to 
private use. Indeed, in one instance a whole county 


was depopulated outside of the towns, by military 
order, and devoted to pillage and plunder, and that the 
third county of the State in population and wealth. 

It was even worse, if possible, in the track of large 
armies and in those parts of the country upon which 
they subsisted. 

No part of the State suffered more than the South- 
west, extending from a line that would strike Eolla, 
Sedalia and Fort Scott, in Kansas, to the State of 
Arkansas. Many parts of that section of the State 
were literally laid waste, and made a desolation by fire 
and sword. The breath of war, like the simoon, swept 
over the country, leaving a wide waste of desolation and 
death, which the benignity of peace and the hand of 
industry can not reclaim and rebuild for many long 

To say that public sentiment in the State was de- 
moralized by such scenes before the end of 1861 is an 
expression too tame to reflect adequately the real fact. 
The moral forces of society were paralyzed, social 
restraints were broken down, and even religious charac- 
ter was powerless either for protection or public good. 
The old standards of virtue, integrity, honesty and 
right principle were borne down and swept away, and 
men became reckless of the laws of God and man. In 
the fury and fire of partisan strife, and amid the familiar 
scenes of blood and death, men trampled upon right, 
crucified truth, murdered innocence, loved vengeance, 
despised virtue, abandoned principle, forgot their loves, 
left their dead unburied and their buried uncoflined, and 
hung upon the bloody war path like avenging furies. 

In the midst of such fearful and wide-spread demoral- 


ization God preserved only a few thousand who would 
not bow the knee to the bloody Moloch. Israel was 
not without an altar, and the altar was not without an 
acceptable sacrifice; but the spirit of anti-Christ seemed 
the more embittered and enraged by that fact, and the 
persecution became more general and unrelenting 
throughout the State. 

Many congregations of quiet worshipers were dis- 
persed; many societies were broken up and scattered; 
many churches were burned, and many ministers ar-, 
rested, silenced or banished — not in the cities so much 
as in the country. 

Amongst the first arrests was that of the Bev. J. Ditzler. 

In 1860 and '61 Rev. J. Ditzler was stationed in Jef- 
ferson City, in charge of the M. E. Church, South. He 
was also chaplain to the lower House of the General 

After Governor Jackson and General Price had 
evacuated the State capital and the United States forces 
under General Lyon had taken possession, Mr. Ditzler 
remained as a non-combatant, supposing that he would 
not be molested. In this he was mistaken. He was 
not allowed long to remain in his quiet study at the 
Ferguson House or to attend to his pastoral duties. 
An "orderly," with a guard of seven men, called on him 
at the Ferguson House, arrested and marched him 
through the city, and put him with others in an old 
meat (smoke) house. He was taunted and sneered at 
by his guard — the Dutch — through the cracks of the old 
log house. Mr. Ditzler talked back at them in German, 
Italian, Spanish, French, Greek and Hebrew, quoting 
freely from Schiller, Goethe and other German authors 


of note, for his own relief and their amusement, until 
he was reported to Col. Boernstein, Post Commander, 
and by him unconditionally released, solely upon liter- 
ary grounds. No charges were preferred against him, 
nor could he ever find out why he was imprisoned. His 
father fought at Tippecanoe, in 1812, and his grand- 
father at Yalley Forge, under "Washington, and this 
treatment was not borne without some little indigna- 

Brigadier-General Brown succeeded Col. Boernstein, 
and Mr. Ditzler was apprised of the purpose to re-arrest 
him. He was advised by his friends to flee, and ac- 
cordingly took the train late Saturday night for St. 
Louis; and at noon the next day (Sabbath) a posse of 
ten armed soldiers entered his church to arrest him, but 
he was gone. They followed him to St. Louis only to 
find that he had taken a train on the Ohio and Missis- 
sippi Bailroad and made his escape. 

The Bev. J. B. H. Wooldridge, the Bev. D. J. Mar- 
quis, and other ministers, were arrested and imprisoned 
about the same time, and without cause. Indeed, it 
became so common for ministers to be arrested that by 
the last of the year 1861 it ceased to be a matter of sur- 
prise to any. The only novelty was in finding a minister 
out of the army who had not been arrested by one party 
or the other, and the most that could be hoped was that 
life and liberty to non-political and non-juring ministers 
would be exceptional. 

If he lived out of the track of large armies, he would 
not escape the marauding bands ; and if his home should 
be so secluded and retired that he could not be reached 
by the public highway, or easily found, there were al- 


ways unprincipled men in every neighborhood who, to 
seek revenge, gain favor with the authorities, or to make 
an opportunity to pillage and plunder from the sheer 
love of it, would go to the nearest military post, inform 
on the quiet "parson/' and volunteer their services to 
guide the ruffian soldiers to the home of the innocent 
victim. From such causes many an innocent man suf- 
fered both in property and person. 

When ministers of the gospel happened to fall into 
the hands of regular army officers or those lawless 
brigands they were treated with a severity and cruelty 
that was not often visited upon others, and which indi- 
cated with alarming certainty the policy that would be 
pursued toward the enemies of all unrighteousness. 

Amongst the many instances of cruelty to ministers 
of the gospel who had committed no offense whatever 
against the peace and dignity of the State, it is sufficient 
here to mention the case of the Rev. James Fewel. 

This venerable servant of the regular Baptist Church, 
who had lived and labored in Henry county, Mo., for 
many years — known, respected and honored as a peace- 
able, upright, good and useful citizen — was found and 
arrested near his own residence and taken off as a poli- 
tical prisoner to Sedalia, thence to St. Louis, where he 
lay in prison more than a month, and until death came 
to his relief. 

His death was due solely to the cruel treatment he 
received from his captors and persecutors. He had 
never taken up arms against his country, had never 
committed a crime of any sort — not even what irrespon- 
sible persons call treason — and had never been engaged 
in lawless acts of any kind ; but, then, he was a minis- 


ter of the gospel, and the parties who arrested him, and 
those who afterward guarded him, had commiseration 
neither for his profession nor gray hairs. He lacked 
only three days of being seventy-two years old when 
he died. 

He was arrested by Capt. Foster's company of Col. 
Hubbard's regiment, Missouri State Militia, in the latter 
part of December, 1861, near his own residence, in Henry 
county. The weather was cold, and when the old man 
found that he would be taken off he begged permission 
to go to his house for more and warmer clothing. This 
was refused him. He then asked the natural privilege 
of sending a message to his aged companion, to inform 
her of his condition and obtain at least a blanket to pro- 
tect him from the weather. Even this poor boon was 
denied the old man, and he was torn from his home and 
hurried away to Sedalia. The weather turned bitterly 
cold, and the freezing December blasts swept mercilessly 
across the extended prairie the livelong night, while 
this old man was kept in an open railroad car, shelter- 
less, bedless, blanketless and comfortless. His very 
prayers and tears seemed to freeze on the chilly night 
air as he thought of home and his long years spent in 
the service of God for the good of his race. But he had 
to suffer this cruel treatment and trust the God of 
Elijah to prepare him for what was still in store for 
him. The morrow came, and with it still further and 
severer trials. The weather did not moderate, neither 
did the severity of his persecutors. With others he was 
placed in a common stock car and sent to St. Louis. 
"With no better protection, no better accommodations, 
than the horned beasts who had been temporarily dis- 


placed by them, and even with insufficient supplies of 
food, they were kept traveling and stopping all that 
day and night. Chilled through and through, hungry 
and half dead, this old man reached St. Louis and was 
hurried off to the military prison, in which he soon fell 
a victim to pneumonia, and lingered — without accusa- 
tion, without trial, and without even permission to be 
seen by his friends — until February 1, 1862, when death 
came to his release and found him ready to " depart and 
be with Christ, which was far better." 

If any charges were ever preferred against him they 
never came to light. 

This is only one of the many instances of cruelty that 
occurred during the latter part of this year, in which 
ministers of the gospel were persecuted and imprisoned, 
and some of them died of their treatment, not because 
they had been in rebellion, or because they were trying 
to save the Union, but because they were ministers 
trying to save the souls of men. 

We have been accustomed to look upon ministers of 
the gospel as the divinely commissioned ambassadors 
of Heaven, sent forth with a dispensation of the gospel 
of peace, preaching "Jesus and the resurrection," and 
" praying men in Christ's stead to be reconciled to God/' 
that their one work was to preach the gospel, build 
churches, devise ways and means for the furtherance of 
the kingdom of grace, project schemes for the enlarge- 
ment of the borders of Zion and for the diffusion of the 
power and spirit of Christianity j to plant the gospel 
standard where it is not, and build up the waste places; 
to do the most possible good to the greatest number, 
and to do this work of love in the spirit of the divine 


Master, by "being an example of the believers, in word, 
in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity," 
"by pureness, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by 
kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned." In 
this way and in this spirit to spread " scriptural holi- 
ness over these lands," and promote "peace on earth 
and good will to men." These ideas of the spirit and 
work of the gospel ministry have become so deeply 
rooted in the hearts of men, and so thoroughly inter- 
woven with their thoughts, that any departure from 
that work as thus understood creates surprise, suspicion 
and distrust in the public mind. 

"When ecclesiastical bodies assemble it is assumed that 
they meet to deliberate upon the legitimate interests of 
the Church of Jesus Christ — how that form of it com- 
mitted to them may be made more efficient in bringing 
men to a saving knowledge of Christ Jesus, the Head 
of the Church, and how their plans and polity may be 
improved and vitalized. 

It was a sad day for this country when the gospel 
ministry first departed from this work and began to 
legislate upon questions purely secular and political; 
and if our free government should ever be broken up 
and our free institutions destroyed — if our religious 
liberties should ever pass away, and a political and 
ecclesiastical despotism be established in this land — the 
philosophic historian of the future, whose melancholy 
task it will be to chronicle the "decline and fall" of the 
greatest republic of the world, will linger with painful 
interest upon that sad event as the beginning of the 

The separate but mutually dependent relations of 


Church and State, the support of the Church and her 
ministry by the voluntary contributions of the people, 
liberty of thought and speech, the freedom of worship 
and the rights of conscience, are almost peculiar to our 
country and form of government. In these things our 
institutions are distinct from, and in contrast with, the 
Church establishments and ecclesiastical hierarchies of 
Europe and Asia. 

They constitute the soul and centre of our free Ke- 
publican government. The very genius of our institu- 
tions resides in them, and the aegis of liberty shields 
and protects them. The State may not restrict or control 
them, and the Church dare not intermeddle with the 
affairs of State. 

The two may exist together, but can never coalesce. 
They must be distinct and separate in their laws, their 
government, their administration, their spirit, their 
agencies and their objects, while they have the same 
subjects. So long have Church and State existed sepa- 
rately in this country, and so widely different in their 
spirit, agencies and objects, that it is both natural and 
philosophical for the public mind to be disturbed and 
alarmed by every attempt of the one to intermeddle 
with the legitimate affairs of the other. 

Few events in the history of this country caused 
greater alarm for our peace and safety in the minds of 
reflecting men than the appearance before the Congress 
of the United States of three thousand and fifty clergy- 
men of New England in the following protest against 
the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, in 1854 : 
u To the Honorable, the Senate and House of Representa- 
tives, in Congress assembled : 


"The undersigned, clergymen of different religious 
denominations in New England, hereby, in the name of 
Almighty God and in his presence, do solemnly pro- 
test against the passage of what is known as the 
Nebraska bill, or any repeal or modification of the ex- 
isting legal prohibitions of slavery in that part of our 
national domain which it is proposed to organize into 
the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas. "We protest 
against it as a great moral wrong, as a breach of faith 
eminently unjust to the moral principles of the com- 
munity, and subversive of all confidence in national 
engagements j as a measure full of danger to the peace 
and even the existence of our beloved Union, and ex- 
posing us to the righteous judgments of the Almighty : 
and your protestants, as in duty bound, will ever pray. 

"Boston, Massachusetts, March 1, 1854" 

This pretentious protest — "in the name of Almighty 
God " — was the first open and bold attempt of the clergy 
in this country to influence national legislation ; and 
while Messrs. Mason, Douglass and others in the United 
States Senate administered to these officious clergymen 
a severe rebuke for thus intermeddling with the affairs 
of the National Government, good men were justly 
alarmed for the result, and the whole country was ap- 
palled by this bold advance of the Church toward the 
control of the affairs of the State. 

Then the finest model of ecclesiastical polity in the 
world trembled and the wisest frame work of civil gov- 
ernment felt the shock. Then the work of our fathers 
— combining the wisdom of the ages and the religion 
of the gospel in one grand structure of civil and re- 
ligious liberty — the glory of Washington, the pride of 


«very American, the dread of tyrants and the admira- 
tion of the world, began to reel upon its throne and 
totter to its fall. Then the deadly virus was injected, 
and the veins and arteries of national life carried the 
poison to every part of the body politic, and from that 
day forth " death was in the pot." Then the axe was 
laid at the root of the fair tree of liberty, whose roots 
had been fastened deep in the national heart, and whose 
hranches already spread over a continent and toward 
heaven, under which the oppressed of every nation 
found shelter, and the down-trodden of every clime 
•sought repose, peace, liberty and life. Then the re- 
ligious and political waters mingled, and the whole 
stream of national life was corrupted and hastened on 
in turbulent commotion to the " blood, and fire, and 
vapor of smoke " of '61. 

Ministers contented themselves then with a firm and 
solemn protest; they afterward made imperious de- 
mands. They sought then to prevent the enactment of 
u a measure full of danger to the peace and even the 
existence of the Union ; " they afterward demanded, in 
the name of Almighty God, the enactment of laws, the 
conduct of the war, the election of men to office, the 
success of party measures, manhood suffrage, and any 
other purely political matter, as though the union of 
Church and State was an accomplished fact and they 
were the constituted vice-regents to supervise and con- 
trol the legislation of the country. 

At the beginning of the war, and during its continu- 
ance, when ecclesiastical bodies met, about the gravest 
matter before them for deliberation was the " State of 
the Country," and how they could deliver themselves 


so as to effect in any particular direction either the 
course of Congress, political elections or the movement 
of armies. This was true in an eminent degreee of the 
M. E. Church, the Presbyterian Church (Old and New 
School), Congregational, Unitarian, and some Baptist 
associations of the Northern and Eastern States. 

Nor were these deliverances confined to the larger 
representative Bodies of these Churches, but the primary 
church courts, ministers' associations, conventions and 
Conferences made themselves conspicuous by such un- 
wise interference with matters purely secular and 

Secret conclaves were held in Missouri by ministers 
and others professing to be disciples of Christ, in which 
plans were devised and projected to persecute, by pro- 
scription, robbery, arrests, imprisonment and confisca- 
tion, if not by means still severer, ministers of the gos- 
pel in this State who would not stultify themselves nor 
disgrace their profession by falling in with them and 
joining the hue and cry for blood and death. 

Consultations were had and schemes devised by 
which the military authorities could be used to oppress 
and persecute ministers whose loyalty was questioned 
by these politico-ecclesiastics, and whose only crime 
was that they possessed property and stood high in the 
confidence of the people whom they had served faith- 
fully for many years. 

Eevolutions never go backward, and it was a part of 
the forward movement of these scheming adventurers 
who followed the army to keep out of danger, and 
who served post and field commanders as volunteer 
aids for the uses they could make of them in taking 


possession of churches, persecuting and running off 
ministers and foisting another ministry on the people. 
It was a settled purpose to drive the old ministers out 
of the State. Those who had planted the Church and 
grown up with her institutions, and whose long and use- 
ful lives were identified with the early and heroic his- 
tory of the Church, had now to give place to new- 
comers, whom the people did not want, or yield to the 
pressure of the new order of things. These ecclesias- 
tical bummers had influence at military headquarters, 
and could use the officers of the army to accomplish 
their purpose; and it was doubtless through their in- 
fluence that so many orders were issued from the Head- 
quarters of the Department of Missouri bearing directly 
upon ministers as a class. Not enough to affect them 
as citizens in common with other citizens, but as 

The following order may suitably close this chapter : 
When Major-General Halleck was in command of the 
Department of Missouri he caused to be issued an 
Order, under date of February 3, 1862, called " General 
Orders No. 29," requiring the "President, Professors, 
Curators and all other officers of the University of 
Missouri to take and subscribe the oath of allegiance 
prescribed by the sixth article of the State Ordinance 
of October 16, 1861," or failing to do so within thirty 
days their offices will be considered vacant, and "in 
order that its funds should not be used to teach treason 
or to instruct traitors, the authorities of the University 
should expel from its walls all persons who, by word 
or deed, assist or abet treason." 

The offices of railroad companies, Government con- 


tractors, agents, clerks and Government emploj^ees, and 
all military officers were required to take either the 
same oath or the one prescribed by an act of Congress, 
approved August 6, 1861. 

This long military order closes as follows : 
" V. It is recommended that all clergymen, professors 
and teachers, and all officers of public and private insti- 
tutions for education, benevolence, business and trade, 
and who are in favor of the perpetuation of the Union, 
voluntarily to subscribe and file the oath of allegiance 
prescribed by the State Ordinance in order that their 
patriotism may be made known and recognized, and 
that they may be distinguished from those who wish to 
encourage rebellion and prevent the Government from 
restoring peace and prosperity to this city and State." 
Or, in other words, "mark them that company not 
with us." 




Church Property — Can the War Revive or Create Titles — Church 
Property on the Border — Maysville, Kentucky — Legal Eights of 
Property — Attainder — Honest Inquiry — Eighth Commandment — 
The Truth of History — Church in Kansas City — North Methodists 
— Faithful Ladies — What was Said at the Time — Some who were 
with us Went out from us — Their loss our gain — Church in Inde- 

fendence — How they Got it and Why they Kept it — The 
'ormer Pastor — Why he left — Battle of Independence — "Black 
Thursday" — A Eev. James Lee — How he got Possession of the 
Church — Eev. Mr. DeMott — How he got Possession of the Par- 
sonage — A Poor Widow Turned Out by Military Order — Strategy 
—Eev. M. M. Pugh Demands the Property— Why Eefused— Ee- 
course to the Civil Courts — Statement of the Case by Counsel — 
Side Scenes — Extracts from the St. Louis Advocate — This Pro- 
perty in the Statistics of Northern Methodism — Action of the 
Missouri and Arkansas Conferences, M. E. Church, on the Subject 
— Eeflections. 

The fact has been stated elsewhere that the division 
of the Methodist Church in 1844 extinguished all right 
and title to the Church property in this State that in- 
hered in the M. E. Church, North. After the Missouri 
Conference voted, in the fall of 1845, to adhere South, 
and by that act became an integral part of the M. E. 
Church, South, according to the " Plan of Separation," 
the other wing of the Church became, in fact and in 
law, dispossessed of all the Church property in the State. 
By the decree of the Church and of the civil courts the 
right and title of the M. E. Church, North, to all species 
of Church property was so effectually extinguished that 
no claim was ever set up and no effort made by that 


Church to gain possession of any church, parsonage, or 
other property in this State, from the vote of the Mis- 
souri Conference in 1845 to the beginning of the war 
in 1861. That Church accepted the situation, acquiesced 
in the decision, and yielded her claims to the decree of 
Missouri Methodism. 

If any claim was ever set up to any species or piece 
of property, or any suit in any civil court was ever in- 
stituted to gain possession of any property during this 
period of seventeen years, the author is to this day 
ignorant of the fact. A residence in the State of nearly 
twenty years has failed to bring the fact to his knowl- 
edge. It is, therefore, of no minor significance that 
these facts stand in the records of history, and must 
enter largely into the consideration of subsequent facte 
now to be put on record. Let them be duly considered 
and they will color with deepest significance the acts 
and doings of that Church during the war. 

It may be that the decision of the Church in Missouri 
was too nearly unanimous, and the force of public 
opinion was too strong in its endorsement of the Plan 
of Separation and the vote of the Conference ; and, then, 
it may be that the few scattered preachers and members 
whose sympathies were with the Church, North, were 
in themselves too feeble at any given point, or had the 
sense of justice and right too strong at every point, to 
encourage any attempt to gain possession of property 
that rightfully belonged to others. If their complete 
acquiescence can not be accounted for upon either of the 
above hypotheses, then it rests with the fact that in 
other States the rights of property would be settled by 
the civil courts; and in Missouri they preferred to await 


the decision of courts in those States where the North- 
ern claimants would not be put at such great dis- 

While the property question was in an unsettled state 
several churches along the border of Kentucky and 
Virginia were put through the sharpest litigation. 

Prior to the decision of the Supreme Court of the 
United States in the great " Church Property Case/' 
appeals were made to the civil courts in several places 
to decide the rights of property, of which that for the 
Church in Maysville, Ky., was among the earlier and 
most noted. 

In this Church, out of a membership of two hundred 
and fifty-six, ninety-seven voted to adhere North. This 
minority had a preacher sent to them from Ohio and 
sued for possession of the Church property. The case 
was carried to the State Court of Appeals, and that dis- 
tinguished jurist, Chief Justice Marshall, in decreeing 
that the property rightfully belonged to the M. E. 
Church, South, among other things, said : 

" There are now two distinct Churches in the place of 
the M. E. Church of the United States — the one the M. 
E. Church, North, the other the M. E. Church, South— 
these two differing from the original and from each 
other only in locality and extent; each possessing in its 
locality the entire jurisdiction of the original Church." 

Wherever the right of property was referred in any 
given locality to the civil courts the decision was the 
same as that above, and the Northern Methodists of 
Missouri acquiesced in the extinguishment of their right 
to all the property formerly owned by the original 


Church, and its legal confirmation to the M. E. Church, 

Now, it may well and significantly he inquired how 
the civil Avar of 1861 could revive the title to property 
that had been extinguished, in fact and in law, by the 
will of its legal owners in 1845? Laws may be re- 
pealed, altered and amended, but not so as to affect the 
previous rights of property. Nothing is more sacredly 
guarded by civil legislation than the rights of pro- 
perty. Laws may change, but justice and equity remain 
the same; and courts of equity not unfrequently pro- 
nounce upon the equity of legislation in respect to the 
rights of property. Hence the strongest rights are 
those founded both in law and equity. 

If the rights of property were revived by the civil 
war it must have been done in one of two ways : either 
by legislation or attainder. It was never claimed to 
have been revived by legislation, which, to say the least, 
was a doubtful expedient, and conferred a doubtful 
right, if any at all. It could not have been done by 
attainting the blood of the lawful property holders, ex- 
cept by due process of law and for cause. This was 
never even attempted. 

Then we fall back upon the original inquiry, how the 
civil war revived property rights that had been ex- 
tinguished nearly twenty years ? What virtue in armies, 
in battles, in fire or blood to resuscitate extinguished 
titles ? What virtue in martial law, in military occupa- 
tion and orders, or in drum-head courts-martial, to set 
aside the legal and moral rights of one Church and set 
up the legal claims of another Church ? Was it the 
right of might, and the might of arms ? Could bullets 


and bayonets set aside or substitute warranty deeds ? 
IL;\v could the battle of Springfield, fought August 10, 
1861, affect the title of Church property in Springfield 
secured by deed of conveyance, dated October 11, 1856, 
to certain gentlemen as trustees of the M. E. Church, 
South, to hold in trust for the uses of said Church ? Or 
how could the battles of Boonville or Lexington destroy 
the rights of property in those cities which inhered in 
the members of the M. E. Church, South ? 

If the ministers and members of the M. E. Church 
sought, under cover of military orders and with the sup- 
port of bayonets, to gain possession of the property of 
others, was it not 'prima facie evidence that their claims 
would not be recognized in law or equity ? and was it 
not a confession to the mean purpose of obtaining by 
force that to which they had no shadow of right in law ? 
If they obtained Church property by unfair and clan- 
destine means, under the covert sanction of the military 
authorities, wherein do they differ from others who 
break the eighth commandment ? Can military orders 
suspend Divine commands and confer a moral right to 
take possession and appropriate the property of others? 
Let these questions, and all others of a kindred nature 
which the curious casuist may be disposed to ask, be 
answered in the light of the foregoing and the forth- 
coming facts. Put that and this, then and now, together, 
and let the conscientious verdict of an enlightened 
public judge between us. 

The truth of history requires a record now, and a de- 
tailed statement of historical facts, that for the sake of 
common honesty, the plainest equity, the humblest scale 
of justice, and the lowest stages of our common Christi- 


anity, should forever be buried with the dead past and 
lie forgotten "as a dream when one awaketh." But 
truth and justice demand many things which a common 
charity, and even a common decency, would consign to 
oblivion. A diluted charity should never make the pen 
hesitate in the presence of important, though unpalatable, 
truths. History must be worthy of its theme, and the 
pen must be equal to the utmost demands of the history. 
" Naught extenuate, and naught set down in malice." 

In 1862 and '63 there was a movement — so general over 
the State that the conviction that it was concerted and 
simultaneous can not be escaped — to seize, possess and 
hold for their own use, by the Northern Methodists, the 
churches belonging to the M. E. Church, South. Per- 
sistent efforts for this purpose were made in almost 
every county in the State; and if the whole history 
could be brought to light it would be seen that there 
was held, at some place or places, a secret conclave of 
ministers in which the purpose and the plan were agreed 
upon. It will not be necessary to specify the particulars 
of every case of church seizure, but the following more 
prominent cases will be sufficient : 

Church in Kansas City. 

In the fall of 1862 Rev. M. M. Pugh, then stationed 
at Kansas City, was forced by persecution to abandon 
his church and charge and flee for protection to a neigh- 
boring military post. Mr. Pugh was watched by enemies 
and warned by friends. The threat, oft repeated, of 
arrest and imprisonment did not deter him. But to 
know that his steps were dogged, that detectives were 
on his track, that his life was threatened, and to be told 


by military officers that they could not be responsible 
for his life any night, and to be advised that there were 
lyers-in-wait to assassinate him, put his life in too great 
peril to remain with his people. He fled. 

As soon as his absence was known the Northern 
Methodists took possession of the church and held it 
under military protection. They organized a society 
composed of a few Northern fanatics and a few renegade 
and weak-kneed Southern Methodists. They pronounced 
the M.E. Church, South, dead and beyond the hope of re- 
surrection, tried to get possession of the church records 
and declare all the former society of Southern Methodists 
members, nolens volens. When they found that but few 
would accept the transfer, they pronounced the rest dis- 
loyal, and threatened them with confiscation. "But 
none of these things moved them,' , and they maintained 
their fidelity to the Church of their choice notwithstand- 
ing all the abuse, and slander, and threatenings, and 
slaughter, that these religious loyalists could bring to 
bear upon them. 

After the occupancy of the church for some months 
they became conscious of wrong-doing and of guilt, and 
in shame and humiliation turned the property over to 
the rightful owners. They found that military orders 
did not confer letters of administration. If the Church, 
South, was dead and buried, what right had they more 
than others to administer on the estate ? 

In the St. Louis Christian Advocate, of May 31, 1866, 
a correspondent from Kansas City makes the following 
statement : 

" But the Church. During the war our Church passed 
through sore trials — had 'fightings without and fears 


within.' She was 'persecuted, but not forsaken; cast 
down, but not destroyed/ Bev. M. M. Pugh remained 
with the Church in Kansas City until the latter part of 
1862, attending to his legitimate business in his own 
quiet way — preaching Christ and his cross to perishing 
sinners — when the presence of blood-thirsty Northern 
Methodist preachers and their willing tools, threatening 
his life on the streets and dogging his steps, hounded 
him otf to safer quarters where he could rely upon the 
protection of military power. The Northern Method- 
ists then took possession of the church, organized a 
society, composed in part of a few blinded fanatics and 
weak-kneed renegades from the M. E. Church, South, 
who at once imagined themselves possessed of other 
people's property, began to abuse and traduce Southern 
Methodists, pronounced the Church dead, and proceeded 
to administer on the estate. 

"But ' military necessity' did not confer upon them 
letters of administration, and they reckoned without 
their host. It is true, the General Conference of the 
M. E. Church, North, enacted a political test of mem- 
bership for all persons everywhere who seek admission 
to her pales; and I submit whether or not they make 
the repeal of the eighth commandment, also, a test of 
membership for the province of Missouri. For it seems 
that no sooner do people get into that Church than they 
proceed to take and to hold, to possess and to use, pro- 
perty for which others have paid, and houses which 
others have built, supposing that membership in that 
Church invests them, under the operation of a 'higher 
law,' with rights and titles above warranty deeds and 
Supreme Court decisions." 


In the same paper, of June 13, 18G6, the following 
statement appears upon the same subject: 

" After Brother Pugh was run off the Church was 
occupied for some time by the Northern Methodists, 
who assumed that the Church property was theirs, to 
have and to hold, with all the appurtenances thereto 
belonging, to them and to their successors forever. 
They abused Southern Methodists roundly, threatened 
them much, and with all the prestige of power assaulted 
the gates of our Zion until they became so offensive that 
all true friends of our Church and of the Government 
gave them a wide berth and left them alone in their 

"Some who in name had been with us, but were not 
in heart of us, went out from us to take shelter under 
their political banner, prove their loyalty to the Govern- 
ment, and — as they were told — save their property and 
their lives, and be fitted, as it proved, to enjoy the 
product of others' labor and the spoils of pious conquest. 

"The faithful of our Church pursued the even tenor of 
their way, and when refused their own house of worship 
met in private houses for worship, and when denied this 
means of grace they kept up the sewing circle and mite 
society, and in this way the { faithful women not a few' 
preserved an organization, a name and a life. While 
their harps were upon the willows they often sat down 
together and wept when thvy remembered their Zion, 
once so beautiful for situation — the joy of all hearts. 
They suffered all that the betrayal of Judas and the 
denial of Peter could inflict upon them. Yet, believing 
truth and right, though nailed to the cross and buried 
in the tomb, would, like the divine Redeemer, rise again 


leading captivity captive and conferring gifts upon men, 
they waited patiently and hopefully till their change 
should come. And it did come, and that by a way they 
knew not. They were, like their Lord, 'despised 
and rejected of men/ yet their faith failed not. They 
had confidence in the Church and the pledges of 
her risen Head. Their faith grew sublime as the dark- 
ness increased and the troubles multiplied about them. 
' The gates of hell shall not prevail against it/ they 
heard in the thick darkness, and bowing to the storm 
they sheltered themselves within the clefts of the ever- 
lasting Eock 'until these calamities be overpast.' 

a There were some men in authority who loved the 
right and hated the wrong. There were, also, ' good 
men and true ' in the Church, whose loyalty to the 
G-overnment was only equaled by their fidelity to the 
Church, and neither could be shaken by all the libels 
and slanders of ecclesiastical hirelings. When such 
men have the adjustment of the rights of property, truth 
and righteousness will at last prevail, aiid justice will 
be reached in the end. To such are we indebted for our 
Church property in Kansas City." 

These extracts show the purpose and the plan of these 
ministers and members of the M. E. Church. The vir- 
tues of superloyalty claimed for themselves, and the 
cry of disloyalty and treason against Southern Metho- 
dists, were not to go unrewarded. It may be unchari- 
table to suspect the motives of others, but it is not 
uncharitable to record their acts and doings when the 
cause of truth and righteousness will be served and the 
truth of history vindicated thereby. 

martyrdom in missouri. 189 

Church at Independence. 

In 1857 the members and friends of the M. E. Church, 
South, erected, finished, furnished, dedicated and paid 
for a beautiful Church in the city of Independence. 
The architecture was half Gothic, and most elegant in 
its proportions and finish, two stories, with Sunday 
school, lecture room, pastor's study, class rooms, closets, 
library and furnace rooms below, and above one of the 
handsomest audience rooms in the State. ' The whole 
cost was over $15,000. A convenient and commodious 
parsonage in the rear, on the same lot, with ample and 
tastefully ornamented grounds for both Church and 

This property was built and paid for by Southern 
Methodists, and used and occupied by them without 
molestation till the fall of 1862, when it was left tem- 
porarily without a pastor. A covetous eye had been 
on it, and the pastor for 1861 and '62 had often been 
warned of personal danger and advised to seek some 
place of safety. He was several times put under mili- 
tary arrest, and several times informed of plots and 
purposes to shoot or hang him. The leaders of ma- 
rauding bands of Kansas "Redlegs" or " Jayhawkers" 
had often sworn vengeance against him because he was 
a Southern Methodist preacher. They had hunted dili- 
gently for some accusation against him, or some pretext 
for taking his life, but he had been too prudent and 
cautious for their purpose; had pursued with singular 
fidelity his own calling, nor turned to the right or left 
for any purpose or party ; had made many warm friends 
amongst the best Union men, who demanded that he 


should be let alone in his work and not molested any 
way by the authorities. They pronounced him loyal to 
his Master, his Church, his country, "and to have 
nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds." 
He felt safe in the hands and under the protection of 
the regular military authorities, even such desperate 
characters as Lane, Jennison, Anthony, Montgomery, 
Nugent, etc., within whose military lines he had lived, 
and preached, and labored without any great annoyance 
or molestation. But the bands of lawless desperadoes 
and plunderers who could be used by designing men 
for any purpose whatever, such as Cleveland and others, 
from Kansas, were too irresponsible and reckless to 
trust. Friends had traveled in the night from Kansas 
City to Independence, a distance of twelve miles, to 
warn him of threats to hang him made by Cleveland 
and other outlaws, and through many other sources he 
was impressed with the fact that to remain would be to 
sacrifice his life causelessly. His friends advised -him 
to seek safety in flight, even the Union military officers 
of the post counseled this course and provided the 
necessary facilities. 

"While his preparations to leave were being made the 
battle of Independence was fought, in which the Con- 
federates, under Colonels Hughes, Thompson, Boyd and 
others, succeeded in taking the city, with its garrison, 
after a contest of four hours. This occurred on the 
morning of August 13, 1862, and precipitated the flight 
of the pastor. After the surrender he spent the day 
in caring for the wounded and dying, the night in pack- 
ing up and storing his effects, and the next day at 2 P. 
M., with his family, his trunks and some few movable 


effects, in a coverless two-horse wagon, he started for 
Lexington and St. Louis. 

He had not been gone two hours when the city was 
re-entered by the Federal forces — a much enraged 
Kansas regiment — and for some cause yet unknown his 
house and church were searched, and every place of 
possible concealment in the whole vicinity visited with 
unsparing vigilance to find him. Enraged soldiers 
stamped the pavement in bitter disappointment, and 
swore loudly that if he could be found the first limb 
would be too good to swing his lifeless carcass for the 
fowls of the air. 

Many a dark day had he shared w T ith his flock, and 
they rejoiced now in his safety. He will never forget 
the " Black Thursday," as it was called by sad distinc- 
tion, when all the men of the city were arrested by Col. 
Jennison, penned up in the Court House yard, and 
guarded by a double line of soldiers all around the 
public square, while the drunken negroes of his com- 
mand were turned loose upon the cit} 7 to free the slaves 
and pillage and plunder the homes of the people to their 
hearts' content. The insults offered the ladies by those 
beastly semi-savages, infuriated by bad whisky, and the 
deeds of horror committed by them, will sufficiently 
characterize the day as the " Black Thursday," and dis- 
tinguish the annals of crime without any detailed 
record here. None can forget the pillage and burning 
of Porter's elegant residence and the very narrow 
escape of his sick daughter, who was rescued from the 
second story only by the efforts of the ladies, in defiance 
of the threats of the brutal soldiery; nor will that line 
of burning buildings, the light of which fell on their 


retreating path all the way back to Kansas City, and 
made lurid and fervid the evening sky, ever pass from 
the mind. Many other scenes of similar character had 
made life and property insecure; and Southern Metho- 
dist ministers were the objects of particular displeasure. 

During that fall, and before the church had been 
supplied with another pastor, a Rev. James Lee, of the 
M. E. Church, North, made his appearance in Inde- 
pendence and demanded possession of the church. He 
first demanded the key, which the rightful owners re- 
fused to give up. He then appealed to the military 
commander of the post. This officer ordered the trus- 
tees of the M. E. Church, South, to report the key to 
his headquarters under pain of confiscation and banish- 
ment. The key was surrendered to him, and he gave 
it to Mr. Lee with his authority to hold and use the 
church. After Mr. Lee got possession of the house of 
worship he, as if to "add insult to injury/' went 
through with a formal dedication service, setting the 
house apart to the worship of God as though it had been 
a pagan temple ; after which it was used by the North- 
ern Methodists as though it belonged of right to them, 
and without any seeming compunctions of conscience. 
The Church, South, had no place of worship, and in 
some respects the ladies of Independence duplicated the 
work and re-enacted the scenes of Kansas City. 

In 1864 Rev. Mr. DeMott was sent by his Church to 
hold possession of and use the property. Not content 
with the church, he demanded the parsonage. He al- 
ready had the coat and he wanted the cloak also. But 
the trustees of the M. E. Church, South, had rented the 
parsonage to a poor widow, Mrs. Brazil by name. 


Mr. DeMott asked her to vacate the house, this she 
declined to do; he demanded the key, she refused to 
give it up. He then appealed to the Commander of the 
Post, and returned with the result of this appeal in the 
form of the following military order : 

" Headquarters 43d Inf. Mo. Volunteers, \ 
Independence, Mo., March 31, 1865. j 

t€ To 3frs. Brazil, living in Methodist Parsonage, Inde- 
pendence, Mo. : 

"It having been represented to the commanding 
officer that you occupy the parsonage belonging to the 
Methodist Episcopal Church, and persist in retaining 
the possession of the same to the exclusion of the minis- 
ter of said Church, using in connection with such refusal 
language defiant of the Federal authorities and treason- 
able to the United States Government, you are therefore 
required to move your household goods out of and 
evacuate said parsonage by the morning of the third of 
April proximo j at which time, on failure on your part 
to comply with this order, your goods will be removed 
by the commander of this station. 

" Yery respectfully, 

"B. E. Davis, 
"Major 43d Mo. Vols., commanding station." 

Now, let it be understood that this property, as well 
as the church, had been built and paid for by the 
Southern Methodists, and of the three hundred members 
of that Church then in Independence, not more than 
eight or ten united with the M. E. Church, North. 

The language of the above order sufficiently indicates 
the representations made by Mr. DeMott to the military 



authorities to influence them to move in that direction 
in their work of saving the Union. 

To turn a defenseless and helpless widow with her 
children and household effects into the streets to make 
room for a Northern Methodist minister to occupy and 
hold property that belonged to others was, perhaps, a 
military movement of great strategic importance to the 
cause of the Union and the restoration of the Govern- 
ment ; but in the light of moral honesty and Christian 
decency the military manoeuvre becomes a pious fraud, 
which the perpetrators were forced, after using its op- 
portunities for several years, to confess before men. 

The church and parsonage were occupied and used by 
Mr. DeMott, when in the fall of 1865 Eev. M. M. Pugh 
was appointed by the St. Louis Annual Conference, M. 
E. Church, South, to the Independence station. On his 
arrival he made a formal demand of Mr. DeMott for the 
property. This was just as formally refused ; the occu- 
pant declaring at the same time that he "had been sent 
there by his Church to hold that property for the use 
and benefit of the M. E. Church, and he intended to do 
it." Recourse was had to the law, and suit for posses- 
sion was instituted. 

This suit was called in the Circuit Court for the spring 
of I860, when Mr. DeMott made affidavit that important 
witnesses were absent and he was not ready for trial — 
the case was continued. The following fall term of the 
Court was held, and the defendants again swore that 
they were not ready for trial. Again the case was con- 
tinued, but it was apparent that the motive for continu- 
ing the case so often was the farther use of the property, 
of which they knew the law would deprive them. They 


were never ready for trial, but bejran to feel the force 
of jDiiblic sentiment and the shame of fraudulent dealing, 
if the sense of shame still remained ; and the wiser and 
abler of them began to fear the penalty, not only of 
fraud, but of rents and damages, and advised a com- 
promise. In February, 1867, they proposed, through 
their counsel, one Col. Hines, to surrender the property 
and pay all costs if the M. E. Church, South, would 
withdraw the suit. To this Messrs. Sawyer, Chrisman 
and Hovey, counsel for plaintiffs, agreed. The suit was 
accordingly withdrawn, the property vacated, and the 
rightful owners took possession. 

The property was much damaged, and involved heavy 
expense in the necessary repairs. Those who occupied 
it evidently felt that it did not belong to them, and 
abused it accordingly. 

To show more fully the grounds of the suit and the 
defense set up by defendants it may not be out of place, 
as an important part of the history of this affair, to in- 
troduce here a statement of the case furnished by Sam'l 
Sawyer, Esq., of Independence, one of the counsel for 
plaintiffs. It is as follows : 

" The Church property at this place (Independence), 
as you are aware, was taken possession of by the M. E. 
Church, North, during the war, and the trustees of the 
Church, South, were compelled to assume the offensive. 
At first a suit by forcible entry was instituted before a 
Justice of the Peace, which was moved to the Circuit 
Court by certiorari ; but as the suit, however determined, 
would not settle the title to the property, it was thought 
advisable to institute a suit, not only for possession, but 
also to quit the title. In this last suit a full history of 


the church at Independence, as well as of the action of 
the General Conference in New York in 1844, and the 
Louisville Convention in 1845, was set up. In the 
answer filed by defendants they admitted the action of 
the General Conference of 1844, and the Convention at 
Louisville, Ky., the following year; also, the action of 
the Missouri Annual Conference of 1845, but deny their 
authority to act in the premises, and assert that the 
property was conveyed for the use of the M. E. Church 
at Independence Station, that they are the successors 
of the original trustees named in the deed of convey- 
ance, and as such they assert their title to the property. 
Within the past few months several passes have been 
made for a compromise,but nothing definite was proposed 
until last Saturday, when I received a proposition from 
the attorney for defendants to surrender the whole 
property and pay all the costs. This proposition, al- 
though not what it should have been, yet, under the 
circumstances, and in view of the uncertainty hanging 
on the future, it was deemed best to accept ; and on last 
Monday morning I received the keys, and possession 
was at once given to the trustees of the M. E. Church, 
South. This I hope ends the controversy. 

"I would be glad to believe that the motive claimed, 
viz., a disposition to do right, was the governing motive 
in giving up the property; but my own opinion is, they 
saw that whenever trial could be had they had no case, 
and hence concluded to get out of a bad scrape with as 
much credit as possible. There was a difference of 
opinion among their members. Those, as usual, who 
had no pecuniary interests, and no property to answer 
for the costs and damages that might be recovered, were 


for fight to the last, while the more moderate and the 
men of means were determined to yield the possession, 
and their better counsels prevailed." 

Thus ended the case as it exists plainly in the facts of 
history, but there are some side lights and side scenes 
in the details without which the affair will not be com- 
plete. A few circumstantial details, which are contained 
in a communication found in the St. Louis Christian 
Advocate, of June 20, 1866, will serve to sample the 
whole. Take the following extracts : 

"And there, too, stands that elegant church, with its 
stained windows and tall, graceful spire, at once the 
pride and ornament of the city ; but its aisles are trod 
by other feet, and its cushioned pews are filled or re- 
served for other worshipers than those who built, or 
bought, or owned the property. The pulpit and altar, 
so tastefully fitted and furnished by the young men in 
1857, are now served by other hands and other tongues, 
and I had almost said by another gospel, than those for 
whom or that for which they were prepared. 

"The parsonage, which has housed so many good 
men of our church and their families, for whom it was 
built, is now occupied by another; and the spacious 
yard, once so tastefully ornamented with shade and 
fruit trees, flowers and evergreens, is laid waste and 
almost bare — now the common resort of horses, cows, 
hogs, dogs and dirty children from the streets. 

" Sadly I turned away from a scene of wrong and 
desecration to pity the moral condition of the hearts 
that could meditate and the hands that could perpetrate 
such sacrilegious injustice. What right have the North- 
ern Methodists to this property? Did they build it? 


buy it? pay for it? or even give one dollar toward 
paying for it? What claim do they set up? What 
show of right? If there be a higher law than civil law 
— if there be another standard of moral justice and right 
than the inspired gospel which they pretend to preach 
and practice — then they may have some show of claim; 
not without. 

" For nearly twenty years that property has been held 
by trustees, regularly appointed, for the use and benefit 
of the M. E. Church, South, and no one questioned 
their legal right or sought to disturb their peaceable 

"But during the reign of, terror, in 1862, '63 and '64, 
under which so many people in Jackson county lost 
their lives, and so many more their property, and under 
the oft-reiterated threats of Northern Methodists and 
their hirelings, with no inconsiderable military pressure, 
this property passed out of our hands without the for- 
malities and fogyism of bargain and sale, or legal 
transfer of title. 

"* * * When the war closed, and President 
Johnson had ordered the return of the property taken 
from us in the South under the notorious Stanton-Ames 
order, the trustees of our church made a civil demand 
for the restoration of this property also, which was re- 
fused by these loyal (?) property-lovers. 

" The ladies, believing that they had the first and best 
right to the property, and chagrined at this refusal, 
entered the church one day with their knitting and sew- 
ing, to the number of thirty, and disposed of themselves 
in a peaceable, quiet, orderly way, to spend the day in 
the house of worship built and paid for by their hus- 


bands, fathers and brothers. The Northern Methodist 
preaeher, soon apprised of the fact, hastened to a eivil 
magistrate and made affidavit that these ladies were 
'disturbing the peace/ procured a peace warrant and a 
constable and proceeded to the church, where he found 
these orderly ladies 'assembled, neither with multitude 
or tumult,' and had them arrested and dragged before the 
civil officer for trial. With all of their 'false witnesses' 
nothing was found in them < worthy of prison or of 
death,' and after binding them over to keep the peace 
the} 7 were released. 

" * * * President Johnson was applied to 
personally for the restoration of this property to its 
rightful owners, as it had been taken under military 
authority and order. He referred the matter to General 
Pope, commanding the Department. Gen. Pope put the 
case, with instructions, in the hands of a subordinate 
officer, and he buried it so deep in his pocket that it 
never came to lio-ht afterward." 

These are only some of the circumstances that seem 
necessary to develop the whole transaction, but they 
must suffice. The case is on record, with many others 
of like character, to go down to posterity as a part of 
the history made during those dark days. The North- 
ern Methodist papers have repeatedly denied that their 
Church ever seized, held or appropriated the property 
of the M. E. Church, South. One more fact will be a 
positive confirmation of their appropriation of this 
property. It is this : 

In the official statistics of the "Missouri and Arkansas 
Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
for 1865 " this church and parsonage are reported and 


valued, the church at $17,000 and the parsonage at 
$3,000. The same property is again reported in the 
statistics for 1866; and then, without any note of ex- 
planation, disappears from the annual statistical report 
of Church property in Missouri. 

To show that this action, with all similar efforts to 
gain possession of the property of others, was encour- 
aged and sanctioned by the Church in Missouri, and was 
only a part of their programme of Church extension, in 
the minutes of the "Missouri and Arkansas Annual 
Conference" for 1865 the following record is made : 

" The following resolution was read and referred to 
the Committee on the State of the Church : 

"Besolved, That the preachers of the Conference be, 
and they are hereby, requested to take all necessary 
steps in order to rejDossess the Church property belong- 
ing to the Methodist Episcopal Church in Missouri." 

That the above committee did most fully meet the 
intent of that resolution the report which was unani- 
mously adopted will show. It is as follows : 

"Your committee beg to record our devout gratitude 
to the great Head of the Church for the rich and glori- 
ous manifestations of his power in the extension of his 
kingdom within the bounds of the Conference. At such 
a time and in such an age as this every friend of the 
truth and every lover of extension should be vigilant 
and hopeful, and more especially as the ministers and 
members of the ever loyal Methodist Episcopal Church 
of the United States, to whom are constantly presenting 
new and extensive fields of extension, labors and useful- 
ness. Advantages of no ordinary character are presented 
at this time. The action of the Missouri State Con- 


vention, by bill of rights, secures to any loyal trustee or 
trustees the right to control any church or educational 
property by application to the Circuit Court for the 
appointment of such other trustees of recognized and 
established loyalty ; and we deem it proper to direct the 
attention of the ministers of the Conference to the fact 
that much of such property now held in this State is 
under the control of the disloyal and treasonable, prop- 
erty which was originally deeded to the Methodist 
Episcopal Church of the United States, and we advise 
our ministers that, whenever practicable, immediate steps 
be taken to possess and retain the same according to the 
forms of law secured by Bill of Rights. It further 
appears to your committee as of great importance, in the 
present state of the Church, that all persons of undoubted 
and established loyalty and holding the Methodist doc- 
trine should, as far as possible, be in communion with 
us, that we may strive together for the advancement of 
our common cause in the earth. In view of these facts 
it is hereby 

"Resolved, 1. That a committee of five be appointed 
whose duty it shall be to draw up a brief address to the 
ministers and members of the M. E. Church, South, 
inviting to unite with our Church all who are truly loyal 
to the Government of the United States, as a common 
government over all the United States, as recognized 
in its constitution and laws, and assuring them of an 
affectionate and hearty welcome to this fold. 

"Resolved 2, That the ministers of this Conference 
are hereby requested to take all necessary steps in order 
to re-obtain possession of the Church property belonging 
to the Methodist Episcopal Church in Missouri, agree* 


able to the provisions of the Bill of Eights enacted by 
the Missouri State Convention." 

Let it be observed that the same State Convention 
that adopted the New Constitution with its notorious 
" Test Oath " ordained also the "Bill of Bights/' over 
which the Conference indulged such extravagant gratu- 

How many Northern Methodist ministers and mem- 
bers were in that State Convention, and how far that 
Church influenced the action of the Convention, and 
how far the said action was intended by its authors to 
restrict the liberty and expose to persecution the per- 
sons of Southern Methodist ministers and affect the 
property of the M. E. Church, South, in this State, 
others may determine from the facts upon record. 

Many things are yet to be revealed upon the subject, 
and the fact can not be escaped that the plan of persecu- 
tion was well settled, thoroughly digested, well under- 
stood and embraced this church-appropriating or church- 
stealing business, under military orders and State Con- 
vention ordinances. 




Church at Lex'ngton — Suit Brought for it by the Methodist Church 
— Statement of Mr. Sawyer — Suit Dismissed — Salem, Arrow Rock, 
California and other Churches — Lagrange Church, History ~~3.o\v 
the Church North Borrowed and then Seized it — Notice Served — 
Colonel W. M. Redding the "Faithful Guardian "—Rev. W. C. 
Stewart — Christian Charity — What a Southern Methodist Says — 
Central Advocate — Mr. Stewart's "Honor" Transmitted — Suit for 
Possession — Arbitration — Louisiana Church — Its History and how 
it was Seized — Civil Courts and Church Trustees — Names Forged 
— Counter Petition — Decision of Court of Common Pleas — 
Supreme Court of Missouri — History of the Case — Opinion of the 
Supreme Court — S. S. Allen, Esq., on Church and State — Rulings 
of the Court — The Case Reversed — Efforts to Compromise — Five 
Years' Possession — Reported in Church Statistics — Supplement — 
Able Argument of Smith S. Allen, Esq. 

Church in Lexington. 

In 1860 the old Methodist Church in Lexington, Mo., 
was torn down and a new one erected on the same lot. 
The new edifice was modeled mainly after that at Inde- 
pendence — a little larger, finer and costlier. Up to the 
time of its completion, in 1862, the Northern Methodists 
had no permanent organization in the city, except one 
improvised for the army and other purposes the year 
before. Since the division of the Church they had 
never had any hold in that section of the State, and but 
for the presence and power of the army it is reasonable 
to suppose that no claim upon that property would have 
ever been set up. They had a few adherents, and about 
the last year of the war they instituted suit for the 


recovery of that Church property. The following state- 
ment furnished by Mr. Sawyer, the counsel for the M. 
E. Church, South, will explain the nature of the suit: 

" The suit at Lexington, as you are probably aware, 
was instituted by certain persons assuming to be the 
Trustees of the M. E. Church against the Trustees 
of the M. E. Church, South. It was an action of 
ejectment for the recovery of the possession on the 
ground of title. The answer set up the action of the 
General Conference in New York in 1844, embracing 
the whole Plan of Separation, as also the action of the 
Southern Conferences in convention at Louisville in 
1845, as well as the action of the Missouri and St. Louis 
Conferences in reference to the Plan of Separation; all 
of which action, it was insisted, was in effect a contract 
between the parties, and valid and binding as such. 
This was the main ground of defense to the action; and 
when I went to the court last fall, expecting to try the 
case, I found the suit had been dismissed and the M. E. 
Church, South, left in the undisturbed possession of their 

Finding that they had no shadow of claim to the prop- 
erty, and no pretext even for getting possession by 
military interference, they withdrew the suit, paid the 
costs, and turned their attention to other places where 
they had a better show of success. 

Salem Church. 

The Northern Methodists took possession of Salem 
Church, in Pettis county, on the Georgetown circuit, 
held and used it for several months, and finding that 
they were not sustained by the citizens, and too remote 
from military posts, they abandoned it from very shame. 

martyrdom in missouri. 205 

Arrow Eock and other Churches. 

The Eev. M. M. Pugh writes : 

" They made an unsuccessful effort to appropriate our 
church in Arrow Bock. The Eev. Mr. Hagerty, one of 
the most active men in this church-seizing business, 
made a visit to that place for the purpose of making 
that church the property of his organization. Our 
friends watched him closely, and he signally failed. 

" They also tried to seize our church in California. I 
believe they were persuaded to desist in this case. Our 
church in "Warren sburg was burned. I do not know the 
particulars. So, also, was our church in Miami, but we 
do not know by whom it was set on fire. 

Church in Lagrange. 

In 1838 two lots in the town of Lagrange, Lewis 
county, Mo., were deeded to B. W. Stith, C. S. Skinner, 
John Lafon, Middleton Smoot and others, trustees, for 
the use and benefit of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
as then constituted. In the following year a small brick 
house was erected on the lots and used by the Church 
in an unfinished condition until 1844. It was then fin- 
ished, and upon the division of the Church passed into 
the hands and ownership of the M. E. Church, South, 
The membership in 1845 voted to adhere South, with 
only three or four dissenting voices, and they acquiesced 
in the will of the majority and remained in the Southern 
Church until after the repudiation of the Plan of Sepa- 
ration by the General Conference of 1848. Up to that 
time the Northern Church attempted no organization in 
Lagrange. But soon after that event the Church North 


sent a Bev. Mr. Chivington (the same who made him- 
self notorious a few years ago in the indiscriminate 
massacre of Indians near Fort Union) to that place. He 
sought and obtained permission to preach in the church. 
After sermon he organized a class of seven members, 
and publicly thanked the members of the M. E. Church, 
South, for the use of their house. 

The members of the Church North recognized the 
validity of the decisions of the courts in the Maysville, 
Ky., and New York and Cincinnati church property 
cases, and set up no claim whatever to the property in 
Lagrange, or elsewhere in Missouri, until after the be- 
ginning of the war. 

In 1853 the old church was displaced by a new and a 
more commodious structure, erected and paid for by the 
members and friends of the M. E. Church, South, at a 
cost of over $6,000. In this the M. E. Church, North, 
took no part, paid no money and claimed no interest. 
In 1863, ten years thereafter, a Eev. Mr. Stewart was 
sent to Lagrange by the M. E. Church, North. This 
man professed great friendship for Southern Methodists, 
and made himself free and easy in their homes. The 
church was only occupied two Sabbaths in the month, 
and Mr. Stewart applied for the use of it when it was 
unoccupied. To this the owners objected at first. Mr. 
Stewart was offered the use of the German Methodist 
Church, but it did not suit his purpose, and he urged his 
application for the Southern Methodist Church. It was 
objected to by a large number of the members upon the 
ground that other churches in the State had been seized 
and possessed by them, some in one way and some in 
another, and they feared this might be a ruse de guerre. 


Mr. Stewart finally pledged bis honor as a Christian 
gentleman and minister to return the key every week 
to the trustees. This he did regularly until January, 
1865, when his quarterly meeting was held in the Church, 
and the Quarterly Conference appointed a board of 
trustees and authorized them to hold possession of the 
property. Upon this action Rev. Mr. Stewart went out 
in town, purchased a lock, employed a carpenter and 
had it put on in place of the old one. He could then 
return both lock and key with impunity. 

The trustees thus raised and authorized to act for the 
M. E. Church served the following notice on the trus- 
tees of the M. E. Church, South : 

" Lagrange, Lewis County, Mo., Feb. 13, 1865. 

u To John Munn, J. G. Goodrich and others, Trustees of 
of M. E. Church, South : 

"Gentlemen : Having a just and legal claim to the 
property of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Lagrange, 
as trustees of said church, we hereby notify you that 
we intend to hold said property for the use and benefit 
of the ministers and members of the Methodist Episco- 
pal Church in the United States of America, according 
to the Discipline and Rules of said Church, and the pro- 
visions of deed recorded in Book C, page 341, Lewis 
county Records. We have accordingly taken possession 
of the herein mentioned property. 

"Done by order of the Board of Trustees of Lagrange 
M. E. Church. W. M. Redding, 

u President Board of Trustees. 

u "W. C. Stewart, Sect'ry pro tern, and Preacher in 

They had either been waiting a suitable opportunity 


or a new light had suddenly dawned upon them from 
some Episcopal, military or other throne of light 
and power, that they had been using, by gracious privi- 
lege and courtesy, property to which they had "a just 
and legal claim," and they acted accordingly. It may 
be characterized as at least very cool. 

Possession is said to be nine points of the law; and, 
if the adage is true, the manner of gaining possession 
will not necessarily raise any curious questions of 
casuistry. The how will not vitiate the nine points, 
when a new lock and key with an extra share of loyalty 
can make up and meet every other point in the legal 
decalogue. It only remained for them to serve the 
usual notification, to save the form of the thing, and 
appoint Col. "W". M. Bedding President of the Board, 
and Colonel of a regiment of Lewis county militia — not 
a member of any church — to hold the property in peace- 
able possession. This duty he performed faithfully; 
for which service he received, in the Central Advocate 
of Dec. 20, 1865, the title of "the faithful guardian of 
the interests of the M. E. Church in LaGrange, Mo." 

A member of the LaGrange Quarterly Conference, M. 
E. Church, South, from whom much of the above infor- 
mation was obtained, writes as follows : 

"The next step," after taking possession and serving 
notice, " was the exhibition of Christian charity (?) to 
us of the M. E. Church, South, by a polite offer to loan 
us the use of their (?) house for our religious worship. 
But we 'had not so learned Christ.' How could we be 
partakers with thieves and robbers? 'My house shall 
be called a house of prayer, but ye have made it a den 
of thieves/ 


a Our house had been solemnly dedicated to the wor- 
ship of Almighty God by Bishop Marvin when there 
was no name or membership of the M. E. Church, North, 
in the place ; we say, let that consecration abide, and 
let God defend the right. We can worship there no 
more until the law, with the whip of justice, shall drive 
those who trouble us to their own place.' ' 

A letter in the Central Christian Advocate, of Dec. 20, 
1865, from Eev. TV. C. Stewart, contains the following 
paragraph : 

"When I was in LaGrange I had the honor to organ- 
ize a Board of Trustees of the M. E. Church, and by 
their authority to take possession of the valuable house 
of worship there, previously in the hands of the Church, 
South. In this movement Col. W. M. Bedding took a 
most prominent and efficient part. He is still the faith- 
ful guardian of our Church property in LaGrange." 

This Col. Bedding was once a member of the M. E. 
Church, South, but withdrew some time before this 
transaction, declaring when he did so that the time 
would come when a Southern Methodist could not live 
in that county. He was a prepared instrument of the 
M. E. Church, North, and well fitted for their special 
work, as he had once been a negro trader to the South, 
and had the price of that human chattel in his pocket. 
A little power makes good Badical leaders and instru- 
ments of such men. 

Mr. Stewart exults in "the honor of organizing a 
Board of Trustees, and by their authority taking pos- 
session of the valuable house of worship formerly in the 
hands of the Church, South." The said "honor" is 
now made permanent and transmitted to posterity. 


Some honors burst like the bubble, others are as endur- 
ing as marble. <( Some men's sins awe open beforehand, 
going before to judgment, and some men they follow 
after." This same Stewart went over to the Congrega- 
tion alists. 

The trustees of the M. E. Church, South, brought 
suit for possession in a civil magistrate's court. It was 
appealed to the Circuit Court for Lewis county by de- 
fendants, and then by same party, upon a change of 
venue, taken to Shelby county. When called in the 
Circuit Court in Shelbyville they were not ready for 
trial. But they had brought suit in the same court to 
test or recover the title, to which a demurrer was filed 
on the ground that they had not kept up a perpetual 
Board of Trustees from the date of deed in 1888. They 
had a Board whose history and authority dated back 
only to January 30, 1865. To prevent a non-suit they 
asked a continuance, which was granted. Before the 
session of the Court in November, 1866, they asked the 
Church, South, to compromise, by referring the whole 
case to three men for arbitration. When this was 
agreed to both parties gave bond in the sum of $500 to 
abide the decision. February 1, 1867, was set for hear- 
ing by the arbitrators. When the case was stated by the 
Church, South, the other part}' asked leave to withdraw 
the bond. To this objections were made, and they 
wrangled over it till four o'clock p. m. The Church, 
North, asked a continuance till nine o'clock the next 
morning. This was granted, and at the appointed time 
the}- appeared and revoked their bond, saying that they 
preferred to have the case tried by the Supreme Court 
of the United States, and would make it a precedent for 


Missouri. "Whether this course was intended only for 
delay their subsequent declaration — that they did not 
expect to be ready for trial for ten years — is the best 

Wearied out of all patience with such miserable ter- 
giversation, the trustees of the M. E. Church. South, 
headed by their pastor, Eev. T. J. Starr, prepared to 
bring suit again, believing that their only hope was in 
the civil courts. As soon as Col. Eedding and those 
who acted with him found that they would have to meet 
the case in the civil courts they proposed a compromise, 
which, during the absence of the preacher in charge, was 
accepted. This compromise gave the M. E. Church, 
South, a quit-claim deed to less than half the two lots 
with the new church, and the M. E. Church, North, a 
similar deed to the old church with the rest of the two 
lots. The old church was just back of the new, and 
within a few feet of it. To settle the difficulty and have 
peace, the rightful owners of the whole property had to 
quit-claim half of it to their enemies, and pay more 
than half the costs of suits, for the gracious favor of a 
quit-claim deed to the other half of their own property, 
and the peaceful possession of their own house of wor- 
ship in a greatly damaged condition. But, then, our 
people have so long been inured to privation, wrong 
and persecution, that they will purchase peace and the 
privileges of unmolested worship at almost any price but 
that of honor and integrity. What are houses and lands 
and earthly possessions to the integrity and purity of 
the " Kingdom of Heaven" and its unperverted insti- 
tutions ? 

In the statistics of the Missouri and Arkansas Con- 


ference of the M. E. Church this Church property at 
LaGrange is returned as the property of that Church, at 
an estimated value of $12,000. 

The Conference session of 1866 adopted the following : 
"Resolved, That the pastor of LaGrange be authorized 
to go outside the Conference limits to procure funds to 
meet the expenses of defending the title to the Church 
property of the Methodist Episcopal Church at La- 

(Signed) "W. C. Stewart. 

"T. B. Bratton. 
"T. J. Williams." 
Comment is unnecessary. 

Church in Louisiana. 

The history of the Church property case in Louisiana, 
Missouri, furnishes peculiarities of a nature that will 
bear a little attention to the details. It is about as 
follows : 

In 1853 a deed to a lot of ground in the city was 
made by Edward G. McQuie and wife to Edwin Draper, 
John S. Markley, John "W. Allen, Samuel O. Minor, 
John Shurmur, Joseph Charleville, Ivey Zumwalt, 
David Watson and Thomas T. Stokes, as trustees of the 
M. E. Church, South, to hold in trust for the use and 
benefit of said Church. Consideration, $500. Soon 
thereafter a commodious church edifice was erected on 
the lot and dedicated to the worship of God in the name 
and for the benefit of the M. E. Church, South. It was 
occupied and used by them unmolested until 1862. 

In the meantime vacancies had occurred in the orig- 


inal Board of Trustees by the death of David Watson 
and the removal from the State of Thos. T. Stokes. 

These vacancies had been filled by the regular 
authority of the Church, and according to law, by the 
appointment and election of Samuel S. Allen and Wm. 
A. Gunn, as seen in the records of the Quarterly Con- 
ference for Louisiana Station. But this fact did not 
prevent the tools of the M. E. Church, North, from de- 
vising a bold scheme that would put them in possession 
of the Church property. They could not claim that the 
property was originally deeded to the M. E. Church 
and afterward wrested from the rightful owners, as in 
the cases at Lexington, Independence, LaGrange, Boon- 
ville, etc. That plea could not serve them in this case, 
and to accomplish their purpose they devised another. 
It was this. An ex parte petition was filed in the Louisi- 
ana Court of Common Pleas, setting forth the fact of 
the above mentioned vacancies in the Board of Trustees, 
and praying the Court to fill the vacancy occasioned by 
the death of David Watson by the appointment of 
Charles Hunter, and to appoint Eobt. S. Strother to fill 
the vacancy occasioned by the removal of T. T. Stokes. 
This petition, as it now stands on the records of the 
Court, was signed by Edwin Draper, John S. Markley, 
John W. Allen, Ivey Zumwalt , Samuel O. Minor, Jos. 
Charleville and John Shurmur, and was granted July 
21, 1862. 

On the second day thereafter (July 23, '62,) Samuel 
O. Minor, John W. Allen, Ivey Zumwalt, W. A. Gunn 
and S. S. Allen filed a petition asking the court to va- 
cate the order appointing Hunter and Strother, and set 
forth the following facts why the .order should be set 


aside : They admitted the vacancies occasioned by the 
death of Watson and the removal of Stokes, but set 
forth from the Church records that on the 21st day of 
January, 1861, Eev. W. M. Newland, then preacher in 
charge, nominated, and the Quarterly Conference elected, 
W. A. Gunn to fill the vacancy occasioned by the death 
of said Watson, and that the other vacancy was filled by 
the nomination and election of Samuel S. Allen, April 23, 
1862, Eev. W. G. Miller then being preacher in charge. 
They, therefore, allege that at the time of the appoint- 
ment by the court of Hunter and Strother no vacancy 
existed, the same having been filled according to the 
law of the Church made and provided, and therefore 
the order of the court ought to be vacated. 

They further represented that the names of John W. 
Allen, Samuel O. Minor and Ivey Zumwalt were used 
in the original petition without their knowledge or con- 
sent, and insisted that the order should be set aside for 
that reason. 

Both the petitioners and community were astonished 
when the court refused to vacate the order, and the only 
recourse was an appeal to the Supreme Court of Mis- 
souri on a writ of error. It may not be improper to 
state in this place that Judge Gilchrist Porter, then on 
the bench of that Judicial District, presided j and Thos. 
J. C. Fagg, then Judge of the Louisiana Court of Com- 
mon Pleas, was counsel for the M. E. Church, North, in 
his own court. 

The cause was argued July 24, '62, and the petition 
overruled. The petitioners filed a bill of exceptions 
and the case went up to the Supreme Court. 

The case was not heard in the Supreme Court until 


January 10, 1866, when the judgment of the court be- 
low was reversed and the case dismissed upon the ground 
of irregularity and informality. 

As this case ma} T involve several legal points of im- 
portance to the Church, it may be proper to transfer so 
much of the decision and rulings of the court to these 
pages as will be of general application. 

S. S. Allen, Esq., for plaintiffs in error, submitted the 
following points of law, and the court ruled accordingly : 

"1. The Church, by means of its preacher in charge 
and Quarterly Conference, had full and ample power to 
fill vacancies in its board of trustees (see 'Doctrines and 
Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church,' p. 254). 

"2. Over the Church, as such, the temporal courts 
of this country most clearly have no jurisdiction, except 
to protect them, and to protect the civil rights of others, 
and to preserve the public peace, none of which were 
necessary in this case (see Baptist Church in Hartford, 
vs. Wittnell, 3 Paige, Ch. 301 ; Sawyer vs. Cipperly, 
7 Paige, 281 etc.) 

"3. There were no vacancies in the board when the 
court below acted, said vacancies having been duly filled 
by the preacher and Conference long before the court 
acted. (See 'Minutes of the Conference/) 

" Dyer & Campbell for defendants in error. 

11 Lovelace, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court." 

In this opinion the court holds the following language, 
after a statement of the case : 

" The case is not free from difficulties. The court be- 
low seemed to be acting under the statute concerning 
' Trusts and Trustees.' But this case does not fall within 
the statute, for that only provides for appointing trus- 


tees in deeds of trust made to secure the payment of a 
debt or other liability. E. C. 1855, p. 1554, §1.) So in 
this case, it would seem that the parties must resort to 
their equitable remedy to prevent the trust from being 
defeated for want of a trustee. 

" There are more informalities than appear upon the 
record, but they are not alluded to by either party. 
The question presented by the parties is, whether there 
are vacancies in the Board of Trustees to be filled. Both 
parties admit that there have been vacancies, but the 
defendants contend that the vacancies have been filled 
by the Church according to the rule and discipline of 
that Church, and the evidence proves conclusively that 
the board of trustees for church purposes, under the 
rules and discipline of the Church, had been filled ; but 
whether, under the peculiarities of this deed, the legal 
title to the property described in the deed will descend 
to the trustees thus appointed seems doubtful. 

" The uses and purposes for which the property is to 
be used is not expressed in the deed, but the property is 
merely deeded to the petitioners, naming them, together 
with Watson and Stokes, describing them as ( Trustees 
of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South/ and to them 
and their successors in office, lawfully aj^pointed, for- 
ever, for a consideration of five hundred dollars. It is 
not stated, except as mentioned in the deed, though it 
may perhaps be inferred that the petitioners at the time 
of the conveyance were in fact trustees of the Church, 
appointed by the Church under its rules and discipline ; 
nor does it appear who furnished the money to purchase 
the property. If it was furnished by the Church, then, 
most certainly, the court, upon proper application, would 


order these plaintiffs to convey it to such person or per- 
sons as the Church might name, to hold it for their use 
and benefit; but if, on the contrary, the money was 
furnished by these plaintiffs, the naked fact that the 
grantors in the deed have described them as ' Trustees 
of the Methodist Episcopal Chiu*ch, South/ would not 
of itself operate to destroy their interest in the property. 
In the former case they would hold the property in trust 
for the Church, and would be compelled to convey to 
any persons the Church might nominate to receive it; 
but this could only be done upon proof of the fact that 
the Church furnished the money with which the prop- 
erty was purchased. 

" 3. Upon the face of this deed the property belongs 
to the grantees in the deed ; and to divest them of the 
title it must be shown aliunde that the purchase money 
was furnished by the Church. The legal title is in the 
grantees ; but in case somebody else furnished the pur- 
chase money, then the grantees will be regarded as 
holding the property for whomsoever furnished the 
purchase money. 

"If, then, the above views be correct, there can be no 
question of vacancy in the Board of Trustees as respects 
this property until the question of the title is first settled. 
If it belongs to the grantees, no trustees arc necessary; 
they can manage it for themselves. If the Church is 
entitled to it, then the grantees must first be divested of 
their title, and the title vested in some person or persons 
for the use of the Church. The proceedings here are 
irregular and premature. The judgment must be 
reversed and the cause dismissed. The other judges 


Pending this case Mr. Allen, counsel for plaintiffs in 
error, made a very able argument upon the relation of 
the Church to the civil government. He took high 
ground upon the separate and distinct jurisdictions of 
Church and State, as understood by our fathers and 
as developed in this country under the genius of our 
government. He characterized severely the efforts 
made by partisan fanatics to confound in fact what was 
distinct in law, and to unite the Church with the State 
for purposes of ecclesiastical power and political cor- 
ruption. His argument was well worth preserving. 

The decision of the Supreme Court in effect sent the 
case back for a trial of the rights of property, for which 
suit was immediately brought in the Circuit Court. But 
under the operation of the order of the Court of Com- 
mon Pleas of June 31, 1862, the church property passed 
out of the possession of the M. E. Church, South, to 
whom it was originally deeded, and into the possession of 
the self and court-constituted Board of Trustees, for the 
use and benefit of the M. E. Church, North. The prop- 
erty was used by them from July 21, 1862, to some time in 
the spring of 1867. In March, 1867, a letter was ad- 
dressed by a number of the trustees to the presiding elder 
and preacher in charge of Louisiana Station, who were 
supposed to have influence with the authorities of the 
Church then holding and using the property, asking their 
kindly offices and services in an honorable and amicable 
adjustment of the difficulty and the return of the prop- 
erty to the rightful owners. 

The following answer was elicited : 

"Louisiana, Mo.,. March 21, 1867. 

u Messrs. Sain. S. Allen, W. A. Gunn and others, members 
of the M. E. Church, South, Louisiana, Mo. : 

" Gentlemen : Your communication of the 4th instant 


is received and would have been answered sooner but 
we have not had time since its reception for consultation 
until yesterday. We would gladly do anything in our 
power to bring about an honorable adjustment of the 
matter of which you write, but as the controversy is 
between you and the trustees of the church, we are 
wholly without authority in the premises, and therefore 
have no right to advise the board of trustees how they 
shall settle the matter. If we had the power to act, our 
action would fully recognize the asserted rights of the 
trustees until the proper legal tribunal decides the ques- 
tion. We will not, however, be in the way of any com- 
promise which the parties may be able to make. With 
assurances of personal regard, we are, gentlemen, 
u Yours very truly, 

"Nat. Shumate. 
"J. S. Bar wick." 

They declined to interfere in the matter as long as 
they could hold and use the Church property. But, as 
in other cases, when they found that they had no shadow 
of title, and could not even frame another pretext for 
holding on to the property, they were magnanimous 
enough to propose or accept a compromise by which the 
property could go back into the hands of the rightful 
owners without the humiliation of being forced by law 
to pay damages and rents, which a common honesty 

The suit for title was stricken from the docket with- 
out being heard, and those who bought the lot and built 
and paid for the church are again in possession of their 
own ; albeit they were kept out of the use of it for nearly 
five years, and then received it in a condition that re- 


quired extensive repairs, for which those who had used 
and damaged it had no disposition to pay a single dollar. 
Thus one by one the property that was taken from the 
Church, South, was restored, after being used and abused 
by u our friends, the enemy.' ' 

It does not add any thing to the credit of the North- 
ern Church to record the fact that this church, also, was 
reported in the statistics of the Conference, valued at 

To those who have believed the reiterated statements 
of the Northern Methodist preachers and press, that 
they never seized, possessed or used any property that 
belonged to the M. E. Church, South, these facts, fur- 
nished by reliable men and taken from official records, 
are commended. The facts are humiliating enough 
without the reflections suggested by them. 


The following able argument in the Louisiana Church 
property case, before the Supreme Court of the State, 
made by Smith S. Allen, Esq., of Hannibal, Mo., counsel 
for plaintiffs in error, is not only a part of the history 
of the case, but too valuable and vital to the great 
questions at issue to be lost. It may very properly 
supplement this chapter, as its merits demand a more 
permanent form than the newspaper columns. It will 
be perused with interest, especially by the legal profes- 
sion, and will not be without interest and profit to the 
general reader. 


Edwin Draper and others, 
ex parte petitioners and 
defendants in error. 

Error from the Louisiana 
Court of Common Fleas. 

Sam'l O. Minor and others, 
plaintiffs in error. 

If the Court please: The extraordinary conduct of 
part of the ex parte petitioners and defendants in error 
in this case is perhaps sufficiently disclosed in the writ- 
ten statement of facts filed by plaintiffs, which I have 
already drawn up and placed on the files of the Court. 
This part of my subject I will, however, with the in- 
dulgence of the Court, consider more fully hereafter. 

This case, on the face of the ex parte petition, appears 
to be an application by seven of the trustees of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church, South, at Louisiana, Mis- 
souri, made to the Louisiana Court of Common Pleas, 
to have two pretended vacancies in that Board of 
Trustees filled by appointment of that Court. These 
seven ex parte petitioners on the face of the petition are 
Edwin Draper, John S. Markley, John "W. Allen, Samuel 
O. Minor, John Shurmur, Joseph Charleville and Ivy 

But in fact this is not the application of three of the 
pretended petitioners, to-wit, Samuel O. Minor, Ivy 
Zumwalt and John W. Allen \ on the contrary, these 
three gentlemen are indignant at the proceedings. As 
evidence of this I will here state that they became, and 
are, parties to the motion to set aside the order of the 
Court below appointing Strother and Hunter to fill the 
pretended vacancies. By their affidavit, appended to 
said motion, they and each of them solemnly swear that 


said ex parte petition was gotten up, and their names 
used therein as petitioners, without their knowledge or 
consent and against their will; and that the same was 
filed and the unjust and illegal action of the Court be- 
low had thereon without their knowledge or consent. 

These gentlemen must not, therefore, be considered 
as acting in concert with Draper, Markley and others, 
but must, in justice to them and to their action in the 
premises, and to their said affidavits, be regarded as 
honest and candid objectors to the petition and to the 
action of the Court thereon. 

These three gentlemen stood before the court below 
on the hearing of the motion to set aside its illegal order 
and made known these facts and verified them by their 
affidavits, and asked the court to revoke and set aside 
its order. And they, with Minor and G-unn, now stand 
before this court in the person of their counsel and ask 
that said order may be set aside. And in this they 
simply ask that that justice may be done to them which 
was strangely and wrongfully denied by the court below. 

Here we have the strange spectacle of three men, on 
whose petition this order seems to have been made, com- 
ing in and disclaiming the whole thing and asking this 
court to set it aside. 

As a legal proposition I maintain : First, that in this 
country the widest latitude is given by law to religious 
sentiment; and second, that the temporal courts have 
no jurisdiction over churches or church judicatories or 
church members, as such, except simply to protect them, 
to protect the civil rights of others, and to preserve the 
public peace. 

In the case of the Baptist Church in Hartford vs. 


Witherell, in the Court of Chancery in the State of New 
York, Chancellor Walworth, in delivering the opinion 
of the court, says : 

" Over the Church, as such, the legal or temporal tri- 
bunals of this country do not profess to have any juris- 
diction whatever, except so far as is necessary to protect 
the civil rights of others and to preserve the public 
peace." (See 3 Paige Eeports, 301.) 

So in the case of Lawyer vs. Cepperly, the same court 
decides substantially the same thing. (7 Paige Chancery 
Eeports, 281 ; see also Angel & Ames on Corporations, 
sec. 58, page 28, note 1, page 29 ; Stebbins vs. Jennings, 
10 Pickering Eep., 172; Gable vs. Miller, 10 Paige Eep., 

I am fully aware that courts of chancery have ample 
jurisdiction to determine questions touching the legal 
title to church property, real or personal ; and that in 
order to protect a Church in the enjoyment of its corpo- 
rate property that court might appoint trustees. 

But even this is to be understood with some limitation. 
Suppose, for example, that a church has full and ample 
power by its own church laws, church courts and judi- 
catories to protect itself or to put itself in a condition 
where it will not need the action of the temporal court, 
ought the temporal court to interfere f Most clearly not. 

And more particularly the temporal court ought not 
to interfere in this case, for the following six plain and 
sufficient reasons : First, because there is no contest in 
this case about property ; second, because no title is in- 
volved; third, because no possession is asked for; fourth, 
because no obedience to rightful authority or authority 
of any kind is sought to be enforced ; fifth, because no 


wrong is sought to be prevented ; and sixth, because no 
injury to the church is sought to be avoided. 

If protection to church property required that Hunter 
and Strother should be put into this Board of Trustees, 
the Church, by means of its preacher in charge and 
Quarterly Conference, had full power to put them there 
to fill vacancies without action of the court below, pro- 
vided vacancies existed. The church law on the subject 
of appointing a Board of Church Trustees and filling 
vacancies therein is found on page 254 of a book entitled 
" The Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episco- 
pal Church, South." It is a book of universal authority 
in that Church, as we all know, and was largely referred 
to by all parties to this contest on the trial in the court 
below, as is fully shown by the Bill of Exceptions. At 
page 254 I find the following plain and simple provision : 

"In the appointment of Trustees, except where the 
laws of the State or Territory provide differently, the 
preacher in charge, or in his absence the Presiding Elder, 
shall have the right of nomination, subject to the con- 
firmation or rejection of the Quarterly Conference. All 
vacancies in the Board of Trustees occasioned by death, 
separation from our Church, or otherwise, shall be filled 
without delay." 

This, then, is full and clear, and confers ample 
authority upon the preacher in charge and Quarterly 
Conference to appoint trustees for the Church and to fill 
vacancies without the aid or interference of the temporal 
courts. It is the identical same provision of the " dis- 
cipline " under and by virtue of which Draper, Markley 
and all the other trustees of that church were themselves 
appointed. They were appointed under and by force 


of this provision long before the date of the deed of 
McQuie and wife to them in trust for the Church. Mc- 
Quie and wife did not apj^oint them. They — McQuie 
and wife — had agreed to convey to the Church at Louisi- 
ana certain ground for a certain money consideration 
paid to them by the Church, and were directed by the 
Church to convey, and did convey, to its board of 
trustees then existing. As the ground was purchased 
from McQuie and wife, and full value received for the 
same, therefore McQuie and wife had no right to appoint 
the trustees, as they would have had if they had donated 
and given the lots. The Church having purchased and 
paid for this ground, had the sole right to say to whom 
it should be conveyed. If the Church had the exclusive 
right then to say who should hold its property in trust 
for it, surely it has that right now. But the Court be- 
low has destroyed that right by placing in the Board of 
Trustees two men — Hunter and Strother — whom the 
Church did not select in its appointed way, or in any 
other way, and by vesting in them the legal title to its 
property without its consent, and perhaps against its 
will. Against Messrs. Hunter and Strother I have 
nothing to say ; but there is not the slightest evidence 
on the record, or anywhere else, to show that> the 
Church at Louisiana is pleased with them or desired 
their services in the Board. 

But the Church, through its preacher in charge and 
Quarterly Conference, as we have seen, not only had 
power to appoint trustees and to fill vacancies in the 
Board when vacancies existed, but I now proceed to 
show that it actually did fill said vacancies — the identi- 
cal same vacancies stated in this ex parte petition to 


have existed at the time of the filing thereof — by ap- 
pointing said William A. Gunn to fill the vacancy 
created by the death of said Watson, and by appointing 
said Samuel S. Allen to fill the vacancy created by said 
Stokes ceasing to be a member of the Church and leav- 
ing the State. To prove this fact I beg to be permitted 
to read to this Court so much of the minutes of said 
Quarterly Conference as may be necessary, and which 
was copied into the bill of exceptions from the minutes 
themselves, and proves the fact beyond all doubt, and is 
as follows : 

"On motion of Brother Newland, preacher in charge 
of this (Louisiana) Station, Brother W. A. Gunn was 
nominated and confirmed as trustee in place of Bro. 
David Watson, deceased." 

Immediately following the above evidence in the bill 
of exceptions I will read further evidence in these 
words : 

"The proceedings of said Quarterly Conference, of 
which the above is part, was had on the 21st day of 
January, A. D., 1861, and are signed by B. H. Spencer, 
presiding elder, and attested by William A. Gunn, 

Surely the minutes of the Quarterly Conference is the 
best evidence of what it did. The minutes thus authen- 
ticated by Spencer and Gunn are as conclusive in fact 
as they are valid in law, and do show that the Watson 
vacancy was duly filled by said preacher and Conference 
just one year, five months and fifteen days before the 
filing of the ex parte petition herein. With this evidence 
before him can any man believe, or can any court de- 
cide, that the Watson vacancy existed in the Board of 


Trustees when the petition of Draper & Co. was filed ? 
Surely not. Then what right had the Court below to 
fill a pretended vacancy that in fact and law did not 
exist ? Certainly none at all. 

I now proceed to show that the Stokes vacancy was 
also a mere pretense, and did not exist in the Board 
when this petition was filed, having been filled by the 
preacher in charge and Quarterly Conference in like 
manner long before this petition was filed by Draper 
and others in the court below. The evidence to prove 
this fact is equally clear and conclusive. I will read to 
the court from the Bill of Exceptions, in these words: 

"The petitioners also offered and read in evidence 
another portion of said minutes, proving that on the 23d 
day of April, A. D. 1862, and at said Conference, the 
Rev. G-. "W. Miller, then preacher in charge of said 
Louisiana Station, nominated Bro. Samuel S. Allen as 
trustee, to fill the vacancy created by the withdrawal 
from the church of Thomas T. Stokes j and proving, also, 
that said nomination was confirmed by said Quarterly 
Conference on the same day." 

Thus the court will readily see that the Stokes vacancy 
was duly filled on the 23d day of April, A. D. 1862, just 
two months and twelve days before this petition was 
filed. To say, therefore, that the Stokes vacancy ex- 
isted in this Board at the time of the filing of this 
ex parte petition is to make sport of language, and is, in 
my humble opinion, wholly untrue. To say that the 
Watson and Stokes vacancies existed in this Board 
when this petition was filed is to deny that G-unn and 
Samuel S. Allen were members of it. And to deny that 
Gunn and said Alfen were members at that time, is to 


deny that the petitioners themselves were members of 
it; for they were all, as we have already seen, appointed 
by the same power and in the same way — that, is by the 
Church, through its preacher and Conference. In short, 
to deny that Gunn and said Allen were members of said 
Eoard when this petition was filed is to deny that the 
Church had any trustees whatever. 

The Board, in fact, when this petition was filed, con- 
sisted of nine members, namely, Draper, Markley, the 
two Aliens — John "W. and Samuel S. — Minor, Shur- 
mur, Charleville, Zumwalt and Gunn, nine in number, 
and it could not lawfully contain any greater number. 
(See Discipline, page 254.) There is, therefore, no room 
in the Board for Strother and Hunter. Samuel S. Allen 
and William A. Gunn must first be ejected from it, and 
this can not be lawfully done without first giving them 
reasonable notice and a chance to be heard in the court 
below. In this case there was no notice until after the 
court below had acted ; and of course no defense was 
made. The action of the court below, taken without ;. 
notice to these parties, is void; and this court ought, for 
that reason (if for no other), to reverse and set it aside. 
Draper, Markley, Shurmur and Charleville well knew 
when they filed this petition that Gunn and Samuel S. 
Allen had been appointed by the jDreacher and Confer- 
ence to fill the only vacancies mentioned in the petition. 
These gentlemen — Draper & Co. — were both attending 
and attentive members of the Board. They took a 
lively interest in whatever affected the welfare of the 
Church. They had acted in the Board with Gunn and 
Samuel S. Allen, and knew when they filed this petition 
that said Gunn and Allen had been appointed to fill said 


vacancies and claimed to be members of the Board. 
But why they desired to ignore their authority and pur- 
posely avoided disclosing the fact to the court below in 
their petition, we are left to conjecture. 

A few more words and I close. The very aims and 
objects of the Churches in this country constitute a 
powerful reason why the courts should refuse to inter- 
fere with their affairs. No man can reflect upon these 
aims and objects for one moment without rejoicing that 
he lives in a land of Bibles and Churches. These 
Churches, including the one in question, aim at nothing 
less than the promulgation of the doctrines of the Gospel 
among all men; the due administration of scriptural 
ordinances; the promotion of works of piety and ben- 
evolence ; the revival and spread of scriptural holiness, 
and, in short, the conversion of the whole world to the 
faith and practice of Christianity. 

An organization of men and women for these high 
and holy purposes ought to be permitted to chose its 
own officers and to manage its own affairs in its own 
way. Whenever the courts of the country have inter- 
fered to settle Church difficulties, they have in almost 
every instance created new and more serious difficulty 
in the Church. In this very case the action of the court 
below has already produced discord and alienation in 
the Church, which perhaps will never be cured. It has 
in that way, beyond all question, done the Church ten 
times more harm than good. 

When there were vacancies in the Board the Church 
filled them, as we have seen, by its own laws and in its 
own way, and there were no complaints, no law-suits, 
no alienations, no withdrawals from the Church. But 


when this petition was filed in the court below, and 
acted upon by that court without notice to anybody, 
and the names of trustees used without their consent, a 
large portion of the Church was uncharitable enough to 
suppose that advantage was sought and wrong intended. 
Besides, this court having large experience in the affairs 
of men will readily see that action by our courts in 
church cases gives great encouragement to discontented 
and litigious persons to annoy the Church with fruitless 
legal proceedings, and thus retard its progress in its 
great work of mercy and benevolence. Better, far bet- 
ter, is it for all parties, and for the cause of Christianity 
itself, to leave these difficulties to be settled in the 
Church where they originate. 

Thanking this Court for the patient hearing which it 
has given me in this case, and hoping your Honors will 
give to the case that consideration which its importance 
requires, I now take my leave of it. 




Church in Boonville — One of the Oldest Religious Centers — Rev. J. 
N. Pierce and his Exploits — "An Honest Looker On"- in the St. 
Louis Christian Advocate — Circuit Court vs. County Court find J. 
N. Pierce — Supreme Court — Howard et al. vs. Pierce — Report 
and Opinion— Circuit Court Sustained — John N. Pierce et al Ex- 
hibited in no Enviable Light — Legal History of the Case — Decision 
— Points to he Noted — Moral Travestie — Judgment of Posterity — 
Church in Springfield — How Obtained -How Long Used — How 
Released — Particulars Reported by a Committee of the St. Louis 
Conference — Church in Potosi — Statement of W. S. Woodard — 
Plattsburg. Fillmore. Macon, Glasgow and ot^er Churches — 
Strange Assertion — Statistical Value of Churches Seized over 
$100,000— How Restored— Property Rights Secured to the M. E. 
Church, South — Great Moral Courage or "Hard Cheek"— "Mak- 
ing History " —Martyrdom of Principle. 

Church in Boonville. 

The church in Boonville is one of the oldest and most 
honored houses of worship in the State. Far back in, 
the history of Methodism in Missouri the Church in 
Boonville became quite a center of religious influence 
and power in the rich and fast-filling counties south of 
the Missouri river and near the geographical center of 
the State. It was for many years a strong base of ope- 
rations for the hardy moral pioneers who first pene- 
trated that part of the State, planted the first standard 
of Christianity and laid broad and deep the foundations 
of Methodism in the wilderness made famous by the 
exploits of the illustrious hunter and pioneer, Daniel 

Bishops and other distinguished men of the Church 


have stood in its pulpit and preached life and salvation 
to the multitudes. Conferences have been held, and 
ministers ordained, and sacraments administered in its 
sacred walls, and for long years it had been a solid, sub- 
stantial station, supporting some of the finest talent in 
the pulpit. No one ever thought of disturbing the rights 
of property. Before the division in 1844 it belonged to 
the M. E. Church. After that event, to the M. E. Church, 
South ; and for over twenty years the latter had been 
in undisturbed possession. If the M. E. Church, North, 
had an organization in Boonville at all before the war, 
it was very feeble, and never set up any show of claim 
to the old church until after the war had come and gone. 

In February, 1866, a Eev. J. K Pierce, of the M. E. 
Church, North, obtained an order from the County Court 
of Cooper county putting him in possession of the 
church in Boonville. The first notice or information 
the Trustees of the M. E. Church, South, had of the 
proceedings was a demand upon them for the key of the 
church by said Pierce, by the authority of the order of 
the County Court. The trustees promptly refused to 
give up the key, and denied the jurisdiction of the 
County Court over such matters. Eut Mr. Pierce was 
not to be defeated in that way. He soon obtained skill- 
ful and corrupt help, went to the church, forced an en- 
trance, removed the lock, put on a new one and took 
formal possession in the name of his Church. 

The following account of the affair was furnished at 
the time for the St. Louis Christian Advocate by one 
who subscribed himself " An Honest Looker-on" and 
who was fully endorsed b} T the editor : 

" Mr. Editor : It affords the people of this community 


pleasure to hear from other quarters: perhaps others 
would be equally interested to hear from us. I write 
more especially for the Church which I believe your 
paper represents. 

" The pastor of the Southern Methodist Church, ap- 
pointed by the last session of the Annual Conference, 
took charge of his congregation a few weeks ago. He 
had not been here more than two or three weeks before 
he and his congregation were turned out of doors by the 
Methodist Episcopal preacher in this city. First, under 
pretense of an order from the County Court, he de- 
manded the key, with all the authority usually exhibited 
by his class on such occasions. Failing in this, he se- 
cured the co-operation of a few kindred spirits, and 
having secured the services of one skilled in such mat- 
ters, proceeded to the church about the going down of 
the sun, effected an entrance, removed the locks, replaced 
them with new ones, and took possession in the name of 
the Lord. It was not the last of the old year, but it is 
said they kept watch-night, it being, as thej^ supposed, 
the last of the old church. Whether their devotions 
kept pace with their watchfulness we are not informed. 
We are told that they affected an exercise of the sort, 
at least for a time. Meanwhile, in strict conformity to 
the Scriptures, they watched, also having their sentries, 
armed it is supposed, stationed at the door; and, not 
knowing at what hour the thief would come, they 
watched, it is said, until the morning. If they expected 
any interference from the owners and former occupants, 
they have yet to learn that it will not do in every case 
to judge others by themselves.-. No Judas came to be- 
tray the Master, with his disciples, into the hands of the 


chief rulers, for it is said that some of the latter joined 
that night the worshipers and watchers. For the first 
time in many years their hearts inclined them to go to 
the house of prayer. 

."The eyes of the community have since regarded 
some of these with peculiar solicitude, looking for fur- 
ther indications of a continued and growing concern ; 
but the proverb is verified : l The dog is returned to his 
vomit again, and the sow that was washed to her wal- 
lowing.' Alas for Ephraim ! his goodness was transient 
as the morning cloud and early dew. 

" The day of their calamity did not overtake the poor 
Southern Methodists unprepared. They were found 
with their lamps trimmed and oil in their vessels. There 
was a good supply of fuel, also, properly prepared; 
carpets, Sunday school library, etc. The house itself they 
found swept and garnished. The ladies, only a day or 
two before, had given it a thorough cleansing. Poor 
souls ! their labor was not in vain in the Lord. * * * * 

" Southern Methodism in this city, though cast down, 
has not been destroyed. Sister churches felt and mani- 
fested sympathy. The Presbyterians kindly offered 
the use of their church on the following Sabbath, and a 
gentleman, who makes no pretensions to religion, gen- 
erously tendered the use of a hall, which at present they 
occupy. The varied character of the seats — chairs, 
boxes, rough planks, old sofas, etc., might excite a smile, 
but, under the circumstances, they are regarded as very 
comfortable. The attendance on the services of the 
sanctuary has doubled since this wholesale excommuni- 
cation. The same is true of the Sabbath School ; and 
on every hand there are manifestations of increasing 


interest. The Church is said to manifest a very good 
state of feeling, exhibiting very little of that bitterness 
and malice which such injuries are apt to engender. 
They forgive and commit their cause to the Lord, ex- 
hibiting much of that l charity that suffereth long and 
is kind/ 

"A writ prohibiting the interference of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church with the property and rights of the 
Southern Methodists was granted by proper authority 
and sustained by the Circuit Court last week. The 
former occupants patiently wait for the officers of the 
law to execute their trusts. When this shall be done 
you may expect to hear from us again. 

"An Honest Looker On. 

" Boonville, March 10, 1866." 

The Circuit Court granted a writ of prohibition, and 
the defendant, J. N. Pierce, appealed to the Sivpreme 
Court, and made a motion by his attorney that all pro- 
ceedings be stayed till the decision of the Supreme 
Court could be had, which would leave him in possession 
o.f the Church until the slow ploddings of law could be 
made. The court would not grant his motion, but 
ordered a writ of restitution to issue instanter, to which 
defendant excepted. 

The legal history of the case can better be seen in the 
"Missouri reports," vol. 38, p. 296, a part of which may 
well be transferred to these pages. 

" This case was commenced in the Cooper Circuit 
Court by filing a petition praying for a writ of prohibi- 
tion to issue against the County Court and John !NT. 
Pierce, stating that the plaintiffs were trustees of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church, South, situate in the city 


of Boonville, on the south half of lot 238 on the plat of 
said city, and that they, as such trustees, were in the 
actual and rightful possession of said Church property, 
and that they and the persons under whom they claim 
have had the actual and adverse possession of said 
church for more than twenty years, claiming the same 
as the property of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
South ; and that the defendant, John N*. Pierce, applied 
by petition to the County Court of Cooper 'county at 
the February term, 1866, and in said petition asked the 
said court to put him, the said Pierce, in possession of 
said church ; and further stating in said petition that 
said County Court, or a majority of the members of said 
court, assumed to act on said petition, and did in fact 
entertain said petition, and made an order and caused 
the same to be entered upon its records, declaring in 
said order who are the owners and entitled to the pos- 
session of said church. The petition further stated that 
said court, in assuming to act on said petition, exceeded 
its powers; that said court had no jurisdiction over the 
subject matter in said petition, and praying a writ of 
prohibition to the said County Court and John 1ST. Pierce 
to prohibit them from proceeding to enforce said order, 

"Upon this petition a writ of prohibition issued, re- 
turnable to the Circuit Court on the 19th day of Febru- 
ary, 1866, and upon the return thereof the defendants 
moved to quash the writ of prohibition, which motion 
was overruled, and judgment was entered by the court 
making the writ of prohibition absolute, and ordering a 
return of said Church property to the plaintiffs. The 
court adjourned till the fourth Monday of May, 1866. 


Upon the fourth Monday of May, at a session of the 
Circuit Court, the defendants, by .their attorney, filed 
and argued a motion to vacate and set aside the judg- 
ment. The motion was overruled, to which defendant 

u The defendant, John K. Pierce, at the session of 
said court made and filed an affidavit and recognizance 
for an appeal to the Supreme Court, which was approved 
by said Circuit Court and an appeal allowed. The de- 
fendant, Pierce, then made a motion that all proceedings 
be stayed till the decision of the Supreme Court be had, 
which was refused by the court, and a writ of restitu- 
tion was thereupon ordered to issue instanter, to which 
the defendant excepted.' ' 

A portion of the opinion of the court throws addi- 
tional light on the subject, and will be sufficient to place 
all the material facts in the case before the reader. For 
the questions of law involving the powers and jurisdic- 
tion of the courts respectively the reader is referred to 
the case as reported in " Missouri Keports," vol. 38, pp. 
296-302.— Howard et al. vs. Pierce. 

" Holmes, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court. 
This was a writ of prohibition against the defendant, 
Pierce, and the Justices of the County Court of Cooper 
county, upon a suggestion, supported by affidavit, but 
without an exemplification of the record of the proceed- 
ings being filed therewith. The suggestion, or petition, 
contains but a very vague and imperfect statement of 
the facts, but we are enabled to gather from it that the 
defendant, Pierce, had filed a petition in the County 
Court praying to have the plaintiffs ejected from the 


possession of a lot of ground and a church building 
situated thereon, in the city of Boonville. 

"The plaintiffs do not appear to have been made 
parties to the proceeding, whatever it may have been, 
and had no notice thereof; but it appears that the 
County Court proceeded to entertain jurisdiction of the 
matter, and made certain orders, the effect of which 
would be to put the petitioner in possession of the 
premises in question, ejecting the plaintiffs. This was 
certainly a very summary process of ejectment. We 
can only say that it is clear for one thing — that the 
County Court had not jurisdiction to entertain such 

"It was said in the argument that the title to the 
property was vested in the county, and that the defend- 
ant's application was only to have the liberty of taking 
possession of the church; but nothing of all this appears 
on this record. So far as we can see by the record be- 
fore us, the prohibition was properly granted. 

"It further appears that, in the judgment which was 
entered, an additional order was made, upon facts made 
to appear to the court, directing the clerk to issue a writ 
of restitution to restore to the plaintiffs the possession 
of the premises which (we may infer) had been taken 
from them by virtue of the orders which had been made 
by the County Court in disobedience to the prohibition. 
We find no warrant in any authority for such a proceed- 
ing. The proper remedy for a contempt would seem 
to be an attachment, to be enforced by fine and im- 
prisonment. The sheriff's execution shows that he had 
made restitution by putting the plaintiffs in possession 
of the church from which they had been thus unlawfully 


ejected. The defendant, Pierce, moved to set aside the 
judgment, for the reason, among others, that this order 
of restitution was irregular, and his motion was over- 
ruled. The Justices of the County Court appear to have 
acquiesced in the action of the court below, and refused 
to join with the defendant, Pierce, in this appeal. * * 
"We see no better way than to affirm the judgment, 
and it is accordingly affirmed. 

"Judge Wagner concurs; Judge Lovelace absent." 
The following points should be noted in making up 
the public verdict upon the action of Mr. Pierce and the 
Church which he represents. 

1. Mr. Pierce obtained from the County Court an 
order putting him in possession of the church upon a 
false plea — that the property belonged to the county — 
without notifying the trustees or any other parties, and 
without making them parties to the proceeding. 

2. Mr. Pierce acted as his own sheriff, and executed 
the unlawful order of the court in an unlawful manner, 
by forcing an entrance to the church, removing the 
lock, substituting another, and, with a self-organized 
posse, guarded the church all night with arms in his 
hands and the order of the County Court in his pocket. 

3. He tried to quash the writ of prohibition issued by 
the Circuit Court, failing in which he tried to stay its 
execution by his appeal to the Supreme Court until that 
decision could be had — to keep possession of the 
property and use it in the interest of his Church. 

4. The M. E. Church, North, of which Mr. Pierce 
was a minister in good standing, indorsed the pro- 
ceedings as a part of her policy — announced by her 


Conference — to get possession of the property of the M. 
E. Church, South. 

5. The unlawful means used in this case was fully 
sanctioned, if not instigated, by the Eev. Mr. Haggerty, 
presiding elder of the district, who was present and 
aided in nearly all the proceedings in the church and in 
the courts. 

6. The act has never been disavowed, disowned, dis- 
claimed or condemned by any Bishop, Quarterly, Annual 
or G-eneral Conference of that Church; nor was Mr. 
Pierce's character ever arrested in an Annual Confer- 
ence for his conduct in this Boonville church affair. 

The same may be affirmed of each and every instance 
of church seizure and appropriation in Missouri. 

If they can escape the judgment of Conferences and 
Courts while party blood is still bounding and burning, 
they may not escape the just verdict of posterity after 
the passions have cooled down, and when the names 
and character of men will be judged by the history they 
have made and the shadows they have thrown forward 
upon the world. 

Church in Springfield. 

Just before the war the members and friends of the 
M. E. Church, South, erected in the town of Springfield, 
Green county, Mo., one of the largest and most elegant 
churches in Missouri outside of St. Louis. It was the 
religious centre and pride of the southwest. That part 
of the State was fearfully desolated by the war, and 
Springfield was an important base of army operations. 
It was a depot of supplies, and a rallying centre for all 
the large armies, the scouting parties and marauding 


bands that operated against the rebels of the South and 
the citizens of that portion of the State. "While the 
torch was applied to nearly every church in the whole 
of southwest Missouri it is a little singular that this one 
should be spared. But so it was. 

At what time it passed into the actual possession and 
use of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and precisely 
how long it remained in their possession, the subjoined 
report made to the St. Louis Conference sets forth. 
Many things are assumed to be of such general knowl- 
edge that no particular and definite information is 
necessary. The authentic information upon the sub- 
ject is a follows : 

1. A copy of a deed of conveyance of a lot or parcel 
of ground in the city of Springfield, made by Daniel 
Polk and E. A. Polk, his wife, to Daniel D. Berry, Jas. 
E. Danforth, Eobt. J. McElhany, Warren H. Graves and 
John S. Waddill, trustees of the M. E. Church, South, 
for the use and benefit of said Church, to erect thereon 
a house of worship, &c. Consideration, 8350. Dated 
October 11, 1856. 

2. A statement of the debt incurred in the erection 
of said house of worship, amounting in the aggregate to 

3. A copy of deed of conveyance of October 22, 1866, 
made by " Eobt. J. McElheny, Warren H. Graves and 
John S. Waddill, as trustees of the county of Green and 
State of Missouri," to Eichard Gott, John Demitt, J. D. 
Perkins, James Baker and E. S. Gott, trustees, in trust 
for the use and benefit of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church, &c. Consideration, $4,700. One thousand of 



which was paid to them in cash, and the balance to go 
to the creditors of the M. E. Church, South. 

Suit was brought by the Church, South, to recover 
the property upon the ground that the remaining mem- 
bers of the original Board of Trustees had no legal right 
to sell and convey the property for their own benefit. 

The case, like nearly all others, was compromised, and 
both the church and parsonage were given up and 
turned over to the trustees of the M. E. Church, South. 

The history of the case, as gathered and reported by 
the committee appointed by the St. Louis Annual Con- 
ference, M. E. Church, South, will be found sufficiently 
full in the following statement of facts and report made 
by the committee to the Conference in 1868. The reader 
will apj)reciate the irony scattered here and there 
through the report if he can not excuse it. The ma- 
terial facts will be found without the publication of the 
correspondence to which the report refers. It should 
not be overlooked that the Northern Methodists took 
possession of the church at the same time they seized 
the parsonage, viz., in 1863. 

" To the Bishop and Members of the St. Louis Conference : 

" The committee to whom was referred the subject of 
your church property at Springfield, Mo., instructed to 
' take such measures as they may deem proper to recover 
the property/ beg leave to submit the following 

" Keport. 

" One member of your committee, E. P. Faulkner, 
residing at Arlington, Mo., and two members in St. 
Louis, and the property in question and parties holding 
it being at Springfield, Mo., we have had to labor at 


considerable disadvantage and loss of time owing to 
these distances. 

" Yet we have endeavored to give the matter all the 
attention so important a trust deserved; and for the 
sake of common justice and our sacred Christianity we 
regret to state that our house of worship at Springfield 
is not yet in our possession. 

" But we are happy to state that we have reason to 
believe we shall soon regain that which is justly our own. 

" A part of your action on this subject at your last 
session was 'that the Presiding Elder of the Springfield 
District should see that the Board of Trustees of our 
property at Springfield be immediately filled according 
to Discipline.' 

"We take pleasure in stating that your instructions 
in this matter have been complied with by Eev. G-. M. 
Winton, P. E., and the following named gentlemen ap- 
pointed trustees : Lawson Eulbright, Elisha Headlee, 
Thomas W. Cunningham, Adam C. Mitchell and William 

"Parsonage Property. — In the examination of this 
question we found that the house was taken possession 
of about the middle of the year 1863 by the authorities 
of the M. E. Church, under an idea that it would be 
destroyed as an enemy of the National Government if not 
protected by them ; and subsequently held and used by 
them under the discovery that it was deeded to the M. 
E. Church — a Church without representative or exist- 
ence in that part of Missouri at the date of said deed. 

" The facts in regard to the title to this property are 
best explained by reference to a letter herewith submit- 


ted, marked A, from Rev. B. R. Johnson, formerly a 
member of your Conference, now of California. 

11 Thus it appears that the title of the M. E. Church 
to this property is from a clerical mistake and a strong 
desire to protect our interests from destruction. 

"We would further state on this point that our ex- 
aminations satisfy us that the rental for the use of this 
property should be at least $25 per month for the whole 
time — four and one half years — it has been saved from 
destruction by our friends (?). As will be seen in a sub- 
sequent part of this report, a claim, equal to the sum of 
the rental, is made by those who have possessed and 
protected this property for ' needed repairs/ We will 
recur to this subject again in its place. 

" House of Worship. — We regret exceedingly to have 
to report a sad disappointment to our friends, the occu- 
pants, who were deprived of the use of this house, after 
great preparations had been made for a fair, festival and 
feast of fat things, by a thunder storm, whose lightning 
struck the church and well nigh settled the controversy 
in regard to it. 

"As soon as practicable your committee convened at 
the St. Nicholas Hotel, St. Louis, and among other 
things determined that it was necessary for one or more 
of the committee to visit Springfield. 

" Shortly thereafter R. P. Faulkner went to Spring- 
field, and on an inquiry into the matter, elicited from 
the authorities of the M. E. Church *a proposition for 
settlement, which will be presented presently. 

" Just previous to this Wm. C. Jamison, a member of 
your committee, received the following letter from 
Judge Baker, of Springfield (marked B). 


" We here present the propositions referred to above 
(marked C), with a letter from E. P. Faulkner to the 
committee (marked 'one'). 

"On receiving this communication your committee 
convened at Arlington (Wm. C. Jamison absent, being 
at that time in "Wisconsin), and on due consideration of 
the propositions, made to them the following answer 
herewith submitted (marked D). 

" This, our answer to the committee on the part of the 
M. E. Church, we enclosed to the Hon. Jno. S. Phelps, 
of Springfield, with the following letter of instructions 
(marked E). 

" Immediately after closing its session at Arlington 
your committee received the following letter from Rev. 
J. J. Bently, P. E. of Springfield District M. E. Church, 
North, relating to the j)arsonage (marked F). 

" This communication was immediately sent to Hon. 
Jno. S. Phelps, our counsel. 

"Thus we have given you all that we have been able 
to do in this matter, simply adding our opinion that 
we will ultimately recover our property. 

" The condition of the church at Springfield, as will 
be seen by reference to the letter of B. P. Faulkner, 
who examined it, requires immediate attention. 

"The damage done to the house on the occasion of 
the defeat of the religions fair is thus reported on by P. 
P. Faulkner: 

"'Though seriously damaged, yet it can be repaired 
for much less than I had any idea of until I visited it. 
I had a builder go and examine and make a rough esti- 
mate of the cost to repair the damage, including every- 
thing but seats, pulpit, &c, who reported to me that, 


if a thousand dollars would not do it, twelve hundred 

" From a careful survey of all the interests of our 
Church in Springfield, we recommend to the Conference 
that measures be immediately taken to secure for that 
station a man of experience, who shall take the charge 
of the society and the oversight of the repairs of the 
church. And to this end we submit the following reso- 
tions : 

" 1. Resolved, That the Bishop be requested to station 
one of the most efficient pulpit and business men at 

" 2. That the Missionary Society be requested to make 
as liberal appropriations as they are able for the sup- 
port of the preacher stationed at Springfield. 

"3. That with the approval of our counsel at Spring- 
field and the recommendation of the Board of Trustees, 
the preacher in charge be authorized and requested to 
visit such places as he may see proper to raise means to 
pay debts and repairs on the Church. 

"4. That the whole matter pertaining to the church 
and parsonage at Springfield be referred to the Presid- 
ing Elder of Springfield District, the Preacher in Charge 
of the Station and the trustees of the church. 
" Eespectfully submitted, 

" W. M. Prottsman, 
"W. C. Jamison." 

Church in Potosi. 

The worthy Presiding Elder of the Potosi District, 
St. Louis Conference M. E. Church, South, makes the 
following statement of the attempt to seize and hold the 


church in Potosi. It furnishes at least an illustration 
of the fertility of resources possessed by these church 
seizers, to use a soft term, and the facility with which 
they could take advantage of circumstances. 

" Mississippi County, Feb. 6, 1867. 

"Bro. M'Anally : I send you, for the benefit of your 
correspondent — a member of the Missouri Conference — 
some statements of an attempt of ' our brethren, the 
enemy/ to take, hold and possess our church in Potosi. 

"Some time during the year 1865 a Mr. or Major 
Miller came to Potosi and reported himself a minister 
of the ' Old Wesley an Methodist Church ;' that he was 
neither North nor South, but belonged to the good old 
Mother Church. 

" As our people had no pastor, they permitted him to 
preach in our church, and attended his ministry. He 
made an earnest effort to proselyte our members, but 
failed. Rumor said he intended to take possession of 
our church, but he denied it. 

"Early in 1866 Mr. Sorin, his Presiding Elder, an- 
nounced publicly from the pulpit on the Sabbath that 
the house belonged to them, and henceforth they in- 
tended to hold and possess the same. 

" That week Bro. Wallace, one of the trustees of the 
church, who had been a member for two score years, 
locked the door, took possession of the key and notified 
Mr. Miller that he could not preach there any more. 

" Mr. Miller then notified Bro. Wallace that he would 
bring suit for the church. Bro. Wallace assured him 
that when the law gave him the house he would give 
him the key. 

"In the meantime the Radicals of the town rented a 


hall for Mr. Miller, in which they put an organ to help 
him make music. 

" I held a quarterly meeting in Potosi in January, 1867, 
and while there I learned that the Rev. Major had sold 
his friends' organ, pocketed the money and gone on a 
long journey toward the north pole. So Madam Rumor 

" Our people are in quiet possession of our church' 
house, have an excellent Sabbath school, an organ to 
help the children sing, a very gratifying increase in the 
membership of the Church, and no fears of being dis- 
turbed by Messrs. Sorin, Miller and company, unless 
they do as their confederates did on Castor — burn the 

" Several of our church houses at other points have 
been quietly occupied by them, but I believe they have 
run their race and are not likely to trouble us much 
more. "W. S. Woodard." 

This case, as it exists in the above statement, ought to 
be sufficient for all the purposes of history. 

In Plattsburg, Clinton county, they purchased an old 
debt and in that way obtained a kind of title to half the 
church. They also purchased an old debt and got a 
title to the Plattsburg High School property, and retain 
it to this day. 

The property of the Southern Methodists in nearly 
every part of the State suffered one way or another, 
and many houses of worship were seized and used by 
the Northern Methodists that were not reported in the 
public prints, adjudicated in the civil courts or published 
in their Conference statistics. 

Amongst the latter may be mentioned the churches 


at Plattsburg, Macon City, Fillmore, and a church at 
Glasgow, built and owned by the Southern Methodists 
for the use of the colored people. They purchased the 
other half of the Plattsburg church, gave up the Fillmore 
church after using it about five years, and never gave 
up the churches at Macon City and Glasgow. 

In the presence of these facts the statement so often 
made from the pulpit and through the press, that the 
ministers and members of the M. E. Church never at 
any time engaged in seizing and appropriating to their 
use the property of the M. E. Church, South, sounds very 
strangely in the ears of candid, honest people. They 
evidently did not foresee the necessity for such a denial, 
and consequently were not very careful to cover up 
their tracks. They so far gloried in the history they 
were making as to report the property they had seized 
and appropriated in their Church statistics, which they 
published to the world. 

The following list of property is taken from the pub- 
lished Statistics of the Missouri and Arkansas Confer- 
ence M. E. Church for 1865-6, and which disappeared 
as fast as the suits were decided or the cases com- 
promised : 

Independence church $17,000 

Independence parsonage 3,000 

Lagrange church 12,000 

Springfield church 12,000 

Springfield parsonage (not reported) 3,000 

Boonville church 10,000 

Plattsburg church 5,000 

Fillmore church 500 

Louisiana church 5,000 

Glasgow colored church 3,000 

Macon church 2,500 

Total $73,000 


To this may be added the churches seized and held by 
them for a short time only, and given up before they 
could be reported to the Conference, the property ob- 
tained for "less than half its value," by buying up old 
debts and forcing sales, where that course was necessary, 
and the furniture and fixtures destroyed and damaged 
in the use and abuse of the property held by them for 
so long, and which was assessed upon the lawful owners 
in the claims of restored decency and comfort, and the 
grand total would reach over $100,000, to say nothing 
of rentals, costs of suits, the damage of deprivation, etc. 

In the face of all these facts, it must require no ordi- 
nary degree of moral courage for men in high position 
to affirm that the ministers and members of the M. E. 
Church never stole, seized, pressed, appropriated or 
possessed themselves of property that did not belong to 
them. Only the moral abrasion of civil war could pro- 
duce the requisite "hard cheek." 

The civil war has passed away. Missouri is no longer 
ruled by shoulder straps and bayonets — the civil law 
is supreme — and even by judges who " neither fear God 
nor regard man/' except of their own party, the M. E. 
Church, South, has been reinstated and secured in her 
property rights. 

Those who figured conspicuously in this church-seizing 
business often and loudly proclaimed that they were 
"making history." True, they made histoiy, and now 
they should not complain if they stand before the world 
in the light of the history they have made. 

If they could afford to make the history and then 
boast of it, we can certainly afford to record it, especially 
when it is a record of the martyrdom of those sacred 
Christian principles for which a discriminating, righte- 
ous charity has no mantle. 




War Claims of Northern Methodists Settled by Ecclesiastical Black- 
Mail — Military Mitres and Episcopal Shoulder-Straps — The Differ- 
ence — The " Stanton-Ames Order" — " The Great Episcopal Raid" 
— "Special Order, No. 15," from Major General Banks — Official 
Board of Carondelet Street Church, New Orleans, and Bishop 
Ames — Episcopal Power then and Ecclesiastical Criticism now — 
Popular Verdict — Abandoned (?) and Embarrassed Churches and 
Ecclesiastical "Bummers" — Church Extension in the South — 
Letters and Extracts — Bishop Clark and " Church Extension Meet- 
ings" — Does the End Justify the Means, or Success Satisfy the 
Demands of Modern Ethics ?— Property Acquired by the M. E. 
Church in the South in a few Years — Four Hundred and Eight 
Churches, Eighteen Parsonages and Eis;ht Literary Institutions in 
two Years, worth $446,659 00, all in Five Conferences — Opinions 
of their Leading Men and Journals — Hon. John Hoo-an, of St. 
Louis, Scuttles the Episcopal Ram — Order from the "War Depart- 
ment, with President Lincoln's Endorsement — Possible Deception 
—Rev. Dr. Keener, of New Orleans, Sues for the Churches of 
Louisiana four Months — McKendree Church, Nashville, Vacated, 
"by Order from Bishop Simpson" — Memorial of the Holston 
Conference M. E. Church. South, to the Chicago General Confer- 
ence, and How it was Treated — Action of Chicago General Con- 
ference — "Stanton-Ames Order" Duplicated for the Baptists — 
Conclusion — Sensible "Warning from the St. Louis Anzeiger. 

Both the purpose and plan for the seizure and appro- 
priation of the property of the M~. E. Church, South, 
contemplated a much wider range of territory than the 
State of Missouri. The M. E. Church, North, had done 
too much to put down rebellion ; had entered too 
heartily into the struggle, sent too many men to the 
front, put too many orators on the stump, offered too 
many prayers from her pulpits and altars for the suc- 
cess of the Union armies and the destruction of all 
rebels, and had supplied too liberally the moral and 


material sinews of war, to lose a golden opportunity. 
The M. E. Church, South, had mai^ fine churches, with 
costly furniture and garniture, in the chief cities of the 
South; and were they not rebels— all rebels? What 
rights have rebels that loyal men are bound to respect? 
Were not Southern Methodists traitors above all others ? 
The Federal Government, as represented in Generals 
Grant, Sherman, Butler and Banks, could confiscate, 
seize and appropriate the property of chief rebels in the 
South, and especially that which had been, or could be, 
used in the interest of treason or rebellion ; and why 
could not the Federal Government, as represented in 
Bishops Simpson, Ames, Clark, Kingsley and the great 
body of the M. E. Church, confiscate, seize and appro- 
priate the church property that had been, or could 
be, used in the interest of treason and rebellion ? 
Rebel chaplains might preach in them, rebel soldiers 
might be quartered in them, rebel hospitals might be 
made of them, and in them the great rebellion might 
receive moral support. What reward for loyalty had 
been specially set apart for the M. E. Church ? What 
the price of her prayers, her sermons, her money, her 
men ? Another, and that the smallest Protestant Church 
in the land, had the best army and navy chaplains — 
had the lion's share of appointments. Did not the M. 
E. Church, South, inaugurate rebellion in 1844 ? And 
when the force of the Southern Church is broken by the 
military arm — when her great centres are broken up 
and her property confiscated or destroyed, and loyal 
men preach a loyal gospel from her pulpits, and teach 
loyalty in her halls and institutions of learning, then 
may it be hoped that the moral and political heresy will 


be exterminated with the heretics. Make the M. E. 
Church a part of the military arm of the Government; 
invest the Bishops with eeclesiastico-military authority; 
supply them with transportation, supplies and military 
escorts; make Department Commanders subject unto 
them, and if the great rebellion is not put down, the 
great national Church will be put up, and the property 
of traitors will be converted to loyal uses. The 
centres of population and power in the South will be 
put under loyal training and discipline, and a moral 
result will be reached which " military necessity" de- 
mands. All moral questions down in the presence of 
a war measure so manifestly right and proper. Military 
necessity has no conscience in the presence of a gigantic 
rebellion. What religious difference between a military 
and an ecclesiastical raid upon the property of rebels? 
Will the Government and the Church ever quarrel over 
the spoils of conquest, whether gained by an Episcopal 
General or a Military Bishop? Episcopal shoulder- 
straps and military mitres may well lose their distinc- 
tion in a common cause against a common enemy. 

The appropriateness and force of these reflections will 
appear in the following well authenticated facts. 

What has been called, by way of distinction, the 
" Great Episcopal Eaid/' had its announcement and 
authority in the following order, issued from the War 
Department of the Federal Government, and known as 

254 martyrdom in missouri. 

" Stanton- Ames Order." 

"War Department, | 

Washington, D. C, Nov. 30, 1863. j 

" To the Generals Commanding the Military Departments 
of Mississippi, the Gulf, the South, Virginia, North 
Carolina, Missouri, etc., etc. : 

"You are hereby directed to place at the disposal of 
Rev. Bishop Ames all houses of worship belonging to 
the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, in which a loyal 
minister who has been appointed by a loyal Bishop of 
said Church does not officiate. It is a matter of great 
importance to the Government, in its efforts to restore 
tranquillity to the community and peace to the nation, 
that Christian ministers should, by precept and example, 
support and foster the loyal sentiments of the people." 
" (Signed) E. M. Stanton, Sec'y of War. 

Thus armed, Bishop Ames started on his Episcopal 
raid upon the Southern Methodist Churches, taking with 
him and picking up along the route down the Missis- 
sippi a goodly number of "loyal ministers." The de- 
tails of his exploits in the South, seizing and appropri- 
ating to the uses of a "loyal religion" the churches of 
others would not be appropriate to this work, but will 
be left to the history of these strange times in their ap- 
propriate localities. 

In Memphis, Tenn., Yicksburg and Jackson, Miss., 
Baton Rouge and New Orleans, La., the Episcopal 
General found and possessed himself of fine and costly 
churches. In the latter city he called the Official Board 
of Carondelet street Church together — the largest, finest 
and wealthiest Southern Methodist church in the city — 


and formally demanded the surrender of that and the 
other Southern Methodist churches in the city to him. 

They objected, and in their objection set forth that 
"Bishop Ames, as an officer of another Church, had no 
ecclesiastical jurisdiction over them." He replied that 
he "claimed no ecclesiastical jurisdiction over them any 
more than over the Catholic or Episcopal Churches, 
but that he came with an order from the United States 
Secretary of War, and an order from General Banks, 
Department Commander at New Orleans, and by that 
authority he demanded the surrender of the churches." 

They replied that, as they "held the property in trust 
for the use and benefit of the M. E. Church, South, they 
could not voluntarily give up that trust. If they did 
so it must be under the stress of a compulsion they had 
no power, civil or military, to resist — the Bishop would 
have to compel them." 

"Whereupon the Bishop obtained a military force, and 
the churches were taken, just as Memphis, Vieksburg, 
New Orleans and Richmond were taken. 

An extract from the Special Order of Major-General 

Banks, then commanding the "Department of the Gulf," 

will show the light in which this church-seizing business 

was viewed by the military authorities as a moral "war 


" Headquarters Dep't of the Gulf, j 
New Orleans, Jan. 18, 1864. j 

" Special Order, No. 15.] 

"Y. In accordance with instructions contained in a 
letter from the Secretary of War, under date of Nov. 
30, 1863, all houses of worship within this Department 
belonging to the Methodist Episcopal Church, South 


in which a loyal minister, who has been appointed by a 
loyal Bishop of said Church, does not now officiate, are 
hereby placed at the disposal of the Rev. Bishop Ames. 

"Commanding officers at the various points where 
such houses of worship may be located are directed to 
extend to the ministers that may be appointed by Bishop 
Ames, to conduct divine service in said houses of wor- 
ship, all the aid, countenance and support practicable in 
the execution of their mission. 

"Officers of the quartermaster's and commissary de- 
partments are authorized and directed to furnish Bishop 
Ames and his clerk with transportation and subsistence, 
when it can be done without prejudice to the service; 
and all officers will afford them courtesy, assistance and 

" By command of Major-General Banks. 

"George B. Drake, 


Under this " Special Order No. 15" the Bishop was 
put in possession of many churches, his ministers pro- 
tected, and this general superintendent and representa- 
tive of the M. E. Church and his clerk were furnished 
transportation and subsistence by the Government as a 
"war measure." 

This involves more than that Church will admit, now 
that military protection from the judgment of enlight- 
ened Christendom will not avail, and now that ecclesias- 
tical criticism is as unsparing as ecclesiastical presump- 
tion was then reckless. The corrollary that the M. E. 
Church made distinct and aggressive war upon the M. 
E. Church, South, and hence claimed belligerent rights 
to capture and hold the property of the enemy in perpe- 


tuity, or until formally given up under treaty stipula- 
tions; is a very unwelcome and uncomfortable position 
to those whose religious consciences were not destroyed 
by a " military necessity." Strenuous efforts are re- 
quired of the pulpit and press to break the force of the 
popular verdict of the people upon the religious and 
ecclesiastical aspects of this "Episcopal Raid." 

The authority thus given to Bishop Ames had a much 
wider and a more general application than his personal 
operations. This gave the sanction to the church seiz- 
ures in Missouri^ Kentucky, Virginia, East Tennessee, 
and all through the South. The Bishops of the Metho- 
dist Episcopal Church and their ministers penetrated 
the South in every direction, and were keen on the 
scent of abandoned (?) churches and other property of 
the M. E. Church, South. They went to the large cities 
and railroad centres ) got possession of churches by 
military order or otherwise — " honestly, if they could, 
but" — they got them, and then went out in every direc- 
tion in search of abandoned, embarrassed and libelled 
property which they could seize and appropriate to the 
uses of a " loyal Methodism." 

While this plan was being executed in the South the 
" Church Extension Society " in the Northern States 
and the " Missionary Society" were furnishing the 
material aid necessary to support the preachers, buy up 
old church debts, force sales and bid in the property for 
the amount of the debt, and thus possess themselves of 
property for "less than half its value." 

To show how the business was carried on, see the fol- 
lowing extracts from a letter of one of their missionaries 

in Alabama — Eev. W. P. Miller — to the Corresponding 


Secretary of the Church Extension Society of the M. E. 
Church, published in the Western Christian Advocate of 
Jan. 1, 1868 : 

" There are two churches that I could secure with a 
little ready money. Can you help us in time of need ? 

" 1. A church, 45 by 55, a plain frame, covered with 
shingles, good floor, with seats and pulpit, but not 
ceiled - } built during the war, but has never been paid 

"Last year I raised two hundred and fifty dollars, 
leaving one hundred and fifty unpaid. The man who 
owns the land and built the house says if we pay him 
the hundred and fifty dollars he will give us a deed, but 
we are so prostrated that we can not do it now. If we 
fail others will do it, and we will be shut out of doors. 

" Another church, 40 by 50, in general description like 
the first. * * * This house was also built 
during the war and partly paid for. The builder built 
on his own land, and was to convey the title when paid 
for. He died in the war, but his widow says she will 
give us a deed if we will pay her the balance, one hun- 
dred dollars. Please help us, if possible, in this case 
also " 

They held " Church Extension " meetings in all the 
Methodist churches in the Northern States to raise funds 
to meet just such emergencies. An account of a "Church 
Extension Meeting," held in Indianapolis, Ind., is given 
in the Western Christian Advocate of February 19, 1868, 
soon after Mr. Miller's letter appeared. The following 
is an extract : 

"At Ashbury chapel Bishop Clarke preached with 
great power, and in conclusion set forth the claims of 


the Society. He presented the wants of three Churches 
in Alabama — one could be saved for fifty dollars, an- 
other for one hundred, and a third for one hundred and 
fifty. The Bishop asked the Church to aid these socie- 
ties of loyal Christians struggling for an existence, and 
Asbury most cheerfully responded in a contribution of 
three hundred dollars." 

Upon the same subject the Northwestern Christian Ad- 
vocate of March 18, 1868, says : 

" When the Church Extension Society was first organ- 
ized, in commending the new cause to our people, the 
Bishops in their address said : ( We know of no agency 
in which the contribution of our people can accomplish a 
greater amount of good.' At a later date Bishop Clarke, 
after a careful suurvey of the field, and especially of the 
South, put the case in stronger terms, and said : ' I do 
not know where else a man's money can be used with 
such certainty of sure and large returns.' " 

He then mentions as an illustration the churches re- 
ported by Eev. "W. P. Miller, and says : " The money 
was forwarded to Bro. Miller and he has written to the 
Corresponding Secretary the results, as follows : ' I have 
invested the means you sent me, and have secured the 
two churches of which I wrote; title all right. The 
churches are frame, and are worth here about $1,000.' ' 

The Missouri and Arkansas Conference, held in Louis- 
iana, Mo., March 7, 1866, adopted the following : 

"Resolved, That the preachers be urged to exercise 
personal supervision over such church property not yet 
secured to trustees, urge the churches to select trustees, 
and when this can not be done, to petition the County 
Court to appoint such officers." (Pub. Minutes, p. 36.) 


The Louisiana and Boonville Church property cases 
are in illustration. 

All the Bishops and all the Conferences of the M. E. 
Church endorsed the work of Church Extension in the 
South, just as it was carried on by Mr. Miller, Mr. Drake, 
Mr. Pearne, Dr. Newman and their associates, and the 
plan was successful. 

In the philosophy of some men the end justifies the 
means, and success satisfies all the demands of modern 
ethics. It will not do to question every wealthy man or 
wealthy Church too closely as to how their property 
was acquired during the war. It is enough for the 
curious to know that they have property, and to hope 
that they have consciences as well. 

That the M. E. Church has property in the Southern 
States in churches, parsonages and literary institutions 
is an admitted fact. That nearly all, if not all, of this 
property has been acquired in a very few years, and 
years, too, of great poverty and destitution through the 
South, will not be denied. Now, take the following facts 
and figures : 

The Tennessee Conference was organized Oct. 11, 
1866, with thirteen churches valued at 859,100. At its 
second session it reported thirty houses of worship and 
one parsonage. The Georgia Conference, at its organi- 
zation, Oct. 10, 1867, reported forty-nine churches. The 
Mississippi Conference was organized in 1866 with five 
churches, and at its session held in December, 1867, re- 
ported forty-seven churches, five parsonages and eight 
institutions of learning. In 1866 the South Carolina 
Conference reports no churches, but at its session in 
Charleston, February, 1868 ; reported forty-nine churches 


and six parsonages. The Holston Conference was organ- 
ized by Bishop Clarke in 1865 with 100 churches, valued 
at $31,250. At its session in October, 1867, just two 
years after, it reported 203 churches and six parsonages. 
These five Conferences, with an average existence of 
two years, report 408 churches, eighteen parsonages and 
eight institutions of learning, at an estimated aggregate 
value of $446,659. The increase up to 1868 will reach 
largely over half a million. 

Others may ask where and how they acquired so 
much property in so short a time, and amongst a people 
desolated and torn by war and impoverished even to 
begga^ and want by the sword, the torch, the pesti- 
lence, the famine, the floods, the drouth, the Bureau and 
the reconstruction. 

The policy of the Methodist Episcopal Church, as an- 
nounced in their great official organ, the New York 
Christian Advocate, and carried out as far as could be by 
their emissaries in the South, was to " disintegrate and 
absorb the M. E. Church, South" 

Dr. Newman, editor of the New Orleans Advocate, 
said in the New York Methodist, of May 23, 1868 : 

* * , * "And we solemnly hold that it would be 
of incalculable advantage to the South, and the cause of 
Christianity therein, if the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
South, should cease to be." 

Upon the reunion of the two Churches, Dr. N. E. 
Cobleigh, of Athens, Tenn., in an article in the Northern 
Christian Advocate, of April 1, 1868, says : 

"The Church property, too, of which we have taken 
possession in the South, must be given back to them 


(the M. E. Church, South,) before they will consent to 
treat upon the subject." 

Dr. Daniel Curry, editor of the New York Christian 
Advocate, said before the Preachers' Meeting of New 
York, in May, 1866 : 

"Wherever we have taken churches the policy has 
proved bad. The first act of the Church, South, toward 
us, after this, was a charge of church stealing — a high 
crime before the law. We did not mean to do wrong, 
but it has put us in a bad position." 

The New Orleans Advocate, of Feb. 10 1866, says : 

a We have seen a letter from Bishop Ames, which was 
dated Baltimore, Md., June 20, 1866, and which con- 
tained this glorious news : l The President has issued an 
order putting us in possession of 210 churches and 32 
parsonages, which the Eebel Methodists in Yirginia have 
occupied during the war.' " 

This was " glorious news " to Dr. Newman, himself 
occupying at the time a church obtained from " Bebel 
Methodists " by this same Bishop Ames upon an order 
from Mr. Stanton, Secretary of War. These Bishops 
had a summary way of getting possession of other peo- 
ple's property. The cry of "Eebel Methodists" and 
treason against the Government from them and their 
tools could always move the Government officials to 
issue such orders as would put them in possession of the 
property of rebels. But whether the rebels themselves 
were crushed out or made better by the transaction, 
are matters about which little was said. 

There is yet another aspect of this general question 
worthy of note. While Bishop Ames was in the South 


prosecuting under "War Department orders his great 
scheme of ecclesiastical piracy, and the many smaller 
ecclesiastics were similarly engaged in other portions 
of the conquered provinces, steps were being taken to 
forestall the Bishop when his ecclesiastical ram should 
be directed against the "Kebcl Methodists " of St. Louis. 
Hon. John Hogan, member of Congress from St. Louis, 
went to "Washington and made representations to the 
President of the facts in the case, and when the good 
Bishop reached St. Louis he was met by an order from 
the War Department, with an endorsement from the 
President of the United States, repealing his Stanton 
order and putting an estoppel upon his proceedings, 
especially in Missouri. 

The following order was obtained by Mr. Hogan from 
the War Department, with President Lincoln's endorse- 
ment exempting the churches of Missouri from seizure 
under Mr. Stanton's order: 

" War Department, Adjutant-General's Office, ) 
" Washington, February 13, 1864. j 


" Major General Eosecrans, U. S. Volunteers, Commanding 
Department of the Missouri, St. Louis, Mo.: 
" Sir : I am directed by the Secretary of War to say 
that the orders from the Department placing at the dis- 
posal of the constituted Church authorities in the 
Northern States houses of worship in other States is 
designed to appl} T only to such States as are designated 
by the President's Proclamation as being in rebellion, 
and is not designed to operate in loyal States, nor in 
cases where loyal congregations in rebel States shall be 


organized and worship upon the terms prescribed by 
the President's Amnesty Proclamation. 

"I am, sir, very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 

"Jas. A. Hardie, 
"Assistant Adjutant-General." 

This order bears the following endorsement in Mr. 
Lincoln's own proper hand : 

"As you see within, the Secretary of War modifies 
his order so as to exempt Missouri from it. Kentucky 
was never within it ; nor, as I learn from the Secretary, 
was it ever intended for any more than a means of rally- 
ing the Methodist people in favor of the Union in locali- 
ties where the rebellion had disorganized and scattered 
them. Even in that view I fear it is liable to some 
abuses ; but it is not quite easy to withdraw it entirely, 
and at once. A. Lincoln. 

"February 13, 186 '4." 

That is a damaging disclosure. Were Mr. Stanton, 
Secretary of War, and Mr. Lincoln, President of the 
United States, imposed upon and deceived by these high 
Church dignitaries ? The famous Stanton-Ames order 
" never intended for any more than a means of rallying 
the Methodist people in favor of the Union in localities 
where the rebellion had disorganized and scattered 
them ! " Was it ever used for other purposes ? How 
about the Churches seized and appropriated by authority 
of this same order in cities and communities where the 
Methodist people had never been disorganized and scat- 
tered, and where " the Methodist people " intended to 
be "rallied" had never been organized — never even 
had an existence ? 


It did not require Mr. Lincoln's sagacity to see that 
such an order was "liable to some abuse/' but it does 
require a good deal of effort to believe that even North- 
ern Methodist Bishops could deceive the Government, 
and then pervert and " abuse " an order from the War 
Department. But we are forced to accept the facts in 
the case. 

The action of Mr. Hogan and his success in defeating 
the purposes of Bishop Ames gave hope and courage to 
others, and in June, 1865, Dr. Keener, of New Orleans, 
went to Washington and made a formal and most earnest 
application to the President and Secretary of War for 
the restoration of the churches in Louisiana to their 
rightful owners. 

He remained in Washington prosecuting his almost 
hopeless mission for four long, weary months. After 
this wearisome prosecution of what seemed to be a for- 
lorn hope, the President (Mr. Johnson) gave the order 
and restored the property, which the Northern Bishops 
could have restored with the stroke of a pen. This 
gracious favor was obtained from the President much 
upon the principle of the widow and the unjust judge : 
"And there was a widow in that city; and she came 
unto him and said, avenge me of mine adversary. And 
he would not for awhile ; but afterward he said within 
himself, though I fear not God, nor regard man, yet, 
because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest 
by her continual coming she weary me." 

So it was the Churches, at least some of them, were 
restored. "And will not God avenge his own elect 
which cry day and night unto him ? I tell you, he will 
avenge them speedily." 


Enboldcned by success, others made application to 
the President for the restoration of their churches. 
Upon such application the churches in Yicksburg, Miss., 
Memphis and Nashville, Tenn., were given up. 

In regard to the latter a Nashville (Tenn.) correspond- 
ent of a Northern Methodist paper says : 

" Things are moving slowly, as far as our church is 
concerned. Upon an order from Bishop Simpson, we 
vacated Mclvcndree last week, and are now holding ser- 
vices in Masonic Hall. Our congregations are small, 
but we hope for better times. * * * * Our dear 
Southern brethren of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
South, persuasion are flocking back to their old haunts, 
and hold up their heads as if they were not guilty of the 
blood and suffering of the past four years." 

"Upon an order from Bishop Simpson" they vacated 
McKendree, after they had been put into it and occu- 
pied it so long upon an order from Bishop or General 
somebody else. But who " ordered " Bishop Simpson ? 
Why did he require his brethren to "vacate Mc- 
Kendree ?" For the same reason that Dr. Newman va- 
cated Carondelet street Church, New Orleans, and the 
churches in Memphis, Yicksburg and other places were 

Others may detail the "pious fraud" upon the 
churches at Knoxville, and Athens, and other places in 
Tennessee, while the general subject only requires here 
a notice of the Memorial of the Holston Conference, 
M. E. Church, South, to the General Conference of the 
M. E. Church at Chicago, in the spring of 1868, and the 
notice taken of it by that General Conference, The 
following is the 



" To the Bishops and Members of the General Conference 

of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at Chicago, Ills., 

May, 1868: 

"The undersigned were appointed a committee at the 
session of the Holston Conference of the M. E. Church, 
South, held at Cleveland, East Tennessee, in October 
last, to memorialize your reverend body, and to set forth 
distinctly the wrongs which we are suffering at the 
hands of agents of the M. E. Church within our bounds; 
and also to entreat you to devise some means by which 
an end may be made to these outrages, for the honor 
of Methodism and for the sake of our common Christi- 

" Our churches have been seized by ministers and 
members of the M. E. Church, and are still held and 
used by them as houses of worship. 

"To give the semblance of legality to these acts and 
of right to this property, trustees have been appointed 
by the authorities of the M. E. Church; and these 
churches are annually reported by your ministers in 
their Conference statistics. 

" From these churches our ministers are either ex- 
cluded and driven, or allowed only a joint occupancy 
with your ministers. From some of them our ministers 
in their regular rounds of district and circuit work are 
excluded by locks and bars, or by armed men meeting 
them at the doors ; from others they are driven by mobs, 
and threatened with death should they attempt a re- 
turn ; at one a presiding elder and a preacher in charge 
of the circuit, at a quarterly meeting appointment, were 


arrested and marched fifteen miles amidst indignities 
and insults; at another, an aged and godly minister was 
ridden upon a rail ; at another, the same man found at 
the door bundles of rods and nails, and also a written 
notice prohibiting him from preaching at the risk of 
torture ; at another, a notice was handed to our preacher, 
signed by a class leader in the M. E. Church, in which 
was the following language : ' If you come back 
here again we will handle you/ and, true to the threat, 
on a subsequent round, not two miles from the place, 
this worthy minister, as he was passing to his appoint- 
ment on the second Sabbath in February last, was taken 
from his horse, struck a severe blow upon the head, 
blindfolded, tied to a tree, scourged to laceration, and 
then ordered to lie with his face to the ground until his 
scourgers should withdraw, with the threat of death for 
disobedience. All this he was told, too, was for travel- 
ing that circuit and preaching the gospel as a Southern 
Methodist preacher; from another, the children and 
teachers of our Sabbath School were ejected while in 
session by a company of men, who were led by a minis- 
ter of the M. E. Church. 

"Our parsonages, also, have been seized and occupied 
by ministers of the M. E. Church, no rent having been 
paid to us for their use. 

" Thirty-six hundred dollars, appropriated upon our 
application to the United States Government for dam- 
ages done to our church at Knoxville during the war, 
were, by some sleight-of-hand movement, passed into 
the hands of a minister of the M. E. Church. This 
money is still held from us. 

u In other cases, school and church property of our's 


on which debts were resting has been forced upon the 
market by agents in your interests, and thereby wrested 
from our poverty and added to your abundance. 

"Members of the M. E. Church constitute, in part, 
the mobs that insult and maltreat our preachers, while 
ministers of the same Church, by words and acts, either 
countenance or encourage our persecutors. In no in- 
stance, so far as we are advised, has any one for such 
conduct been arraigned, or censured even, by those ad- 
ministering the discipline of your Church. 

u We could specify the name of each of these churches, 
and the locality, were it necessary, in which our minis- 
ters and people are either permitted sometimes to 
worship, or from which they are excluded and driven 
by locks, threats, mobs and bloody persecutions. Their 
names are in our possession, and at your disposal. 
About one hundred church edifices are held in one or 
another of these ways, with a value of not less than 
seventy-five thousand dollars. 

"Of this property, it should be added, some was 
deeded to the M. E. Church before 1844, and the rest, 
since that time, to the M. E. Church, South. That it is 
all claimed by the M. E. Church in East Tennessee we 
suppose to be true, or it would not be reported and re- 
ceived in their Annual Conference statistics. That it 
belongs to the M. E. Church, South, we suppose also to 
be true, inasmuch as all deeds since 1844 have been made 
to us, and all the remainder were granted to us by the 
decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in 
the Church suit ; unless the ground be assumed by your 
reverend body that when Lee surrendered to Grant the 
M. E. Church, South, surrendered also to the M. E. 


Church all her property rights. Surely if the United 
States Government does not confiscate the property of 
those who are called rebels, the M. E. Church, in her 
highest legislative assembly, will hardly set a precedent 
by claiming the property of their Southern brethren. 

u But it may, perhaps, be said that we have been sin- 
ners, rebels, traitors, touching our civil and political 
relations to the Government. If this be so, we are un- 
able to comprehend by what authority we are to be 
punished by the M. E. Church, since for our moral 
obliquities we are responsible alone to God, and for our 
political crimes only to the United States Government. 

" It may also be asked, what jurisdiction has your 
General Conference over these deeds of injustice? No 
civil jurisdiction, we are aware ; but your reverend body 
does possess a moral power of such weight that, if 
brought to bear in East Tennessee, there would be an 
end to these acts of oppression and cruelty. A word 
of disapproval, even, from your Board of Bishops, or 
the publication in your Church papers of some of the 
above cited facts, with editorial condemnation, would 
have done much to mitigate, if not entirely to remove, 
the cause of our complaints; but we have neither heard 
the one nor seen the other. Why this has not been 
done is believed by us to be a want of knowledge of 
these facts, of which we now put you in possession. 
Familiar as we are with the condition of things in East 
Tennessee, and with the workings of the two Metho- 
disms there, we are satisfied that your body could, by 
judicious action, remove most, if not all, of the causes 
which now occasion strife, degrade Methodism, and 
scandalize our holy religion. We, therefore, ask— 


"1st. That you will ascertain the grounds upon 
which the M. E. Church claims and holds the property 
in church buildings and parsonages within her bounds 
in East Tennessee, as reported in her Holston Mission 
Conference statistics. 

" 2d. If in the investigation any property so reported 
shall be adjudged by you to belong of right to the M. E. 
Church, South, that you will designate what that pro- 
perty is, and where ; and also instruct your ministers 
and people to relinquish their claims upon the same, re- 
possess us, and leave us in the undisturbed occupancy 

" 3d. Inasmuch as your words of wisdom and of 
justice will be words of power, that you earnestly ad- 
vise all your ministers laboring in this field to abstain 
from every word and act the tendency of which would 
be the subversion of good order and peace in the com- 
munities in which they move. 

"In conclusion, allow us to add, that in presenting 
this memorial to your reverend body we are moved 
thereto by no other spirit than that of ardent desire to 
promote the interests of our common Redeemer by 
' spreading scriptural holiness over these lands/ 

"E. E. Wiley, 


"Wm. Robeson, 
"B. Arbogast, 
" C. Long, 
"J. M. McTeer, 


"Members of the Holston Conference of the M. E. 
Church, South. 
"April, 1868." 


This memorial, so respectful and dignified, and upon 
so grave a matter, was referred, without being read or 
printed, to a select committee of seven. And though 
presented and referred early in the session, no further 
notice was taken of it, and the committee did not bring 
in a report until the very last day of the session and 
just before the final adjournment. The report of the 
select committee was read amid great confusion, and 
passed without debate by a very small vote, but few of 
the members of the General Conference feeling inter- 
ested enough either to listen or vote. 

The Daily Advocate, of June 3, 1868, contains the fol- 
lowing account of the affair, with the report of the 
special committee as adopted : 

"The report of the committee on the memorial of the 
Holston Conference was presented and read, and, on 
motion, adopted. 

" The report, as adopted, is as follows : 

"Your committee have had before them a memorial 
from a committee of seven appointed by the Holston 
Conference, of the M. E. Church, South, stating that 
our ministers and people within that region have seized 
the churches and parsonages belonging to said Church, 
South, and maltreated their ministers. The statements 
of the paper are all indefinite, both as to places, times 
and persons, and no one has appeared to explain or de- 
fend the charges. On the contrary, we have also before 
us, referred to our consideration, numerous affidavits 
from ministers and members of our Church, in various 
parts of this country, evidently designed to refute any 
charges that might be presented by this committee of 
seven. It seems from these papers that as soon as the 


federal power was re-established in East Tennessee whole 
congregations came over to the JMT. E. Church, bringing 
with them their churches and parsonages, that they 
might continue to use them for worship. It also seems 
that much of the property in question is deeded to the 
M. E. Church, it being so held before the secession of 
the Church, South. We have no proof that any in con- 
test is held otherwise. The General Conference possesses 
no power, if it would, to divest the occupants of this 
property of the use or ownership of it, paid for by their 
means, and would be guilty of great impropriety in in- 
terfering at all at this time when test cases are already 
before the courts. If, however, we should proceed so to 
do, with the evidence before us largely ex parte, it is 
true, but all that we have, the presentation of the memo- 
rialists can not be sustained. By personal examinations 
we have endeavored in vain to ascertain what founda- 
tion there is for the affirmation that our ministers and 
people encourage violence toward the ministers of the 
M. E. Church, South. We believe and trust there is no 
foundation for the charge, for if true, it could but meet 
our unqualified disapprobation. Our own ministers and 
people in the South suffer severely in this way, and 
sometimes, we apprehend, at the hands of our Southern 
brethren, but neither the spirit of our Master, the genius 
of our people, nor our denominational interest could 
allow us to approbate in any parties the practice. We 
are glad to know that our brethren laboring in that re- 
gion had their attention early called to these matters, 
and we content ourself with repeating the sentiments 
of their address to the people. It was in effect as 

published in the Knoxville Whig, by authority of at 



least four presiding ciders, and several other members 
of the Holston Conference, as well as often stated from 
our pulpits in the South, and through our Church papers 
in the North, that violence toward the preachers and 
people of the Church, South, is unwise, unchristian and 
dangerous. Our preachers and people in the South, so 
far as we are apprised and believe, have all and ever 
held this position on the subject. "We recommend the 
following : 

"Resolved, That all the papers connected with this 
matter be referred to the Holston Conference, believing 
as we do that this Conference, in the future as in the 
past, will be careful to do justly, and, as much as lieth 
in them, to live peaceably with all men. 

u Your committee have also had before them a letter, 
published in various Southern journals, and signed by 
S. F. "Waldro, being dated from Chicago, and presuming 
to state the objects and intentions of the Methodist 
Episcopal Conference in the prosecution of its Southern 
work. We are also informed that several similar letters 
have been published in the South. No effort that we 
have been able to make has enabled us to discover any 
such person in this city. Certainly no such person has 
a right to speak in our behalf or declare our purposes, 
much less does he declare them correctly. fc We recom- 
mend that the paper be dismissed as anonymous and 
unworthy of our further consideration. 

" L. Hitchcock, Chairman. 

"J. M. Eeid, Secretary." 

The War Department at Washington issued an order 
similar to the " Stanton-Ames Order," in the interests 
of the " American Baptist Home Mission Society," re- 


quiring all houses of worship belonging to the Baptists 
in the military departments of the South, in which a 
loyal minister did not officiate, to be turned over to the 
agents or officers of the American Baptist Home Mission 
Society, and ordering Government transportation and 
subsistence to be furnished such agents and their clerks. 
Dated Jan. 14, 1864. 

This was a new mode of warfare, and will ever stand 
upon the historic page as humiliating to enlightened 
Christian sentiment, as it is forever damaging to the 
spirit and genius of American institutions and the true 
interests of Messiah's kingdom on earth. 

While American citizens are generally unwilling to 
be instructed in the higher civil and religious interests 
of this country by foreigners, yet it will not be denied 
that many of the finest, shrewdest and wisest journalists 
of the country are from foreign lands. 

As a befitting close to this part of the subject, and a 
wise warning to the politico-religious fanatics who think 
little of the effect of their reckless disregard of the 
sacred relations of Church and State, an extract from 
the St. Louis Anzeiger, a German paper of much char- 
acter and influence, will be appropriate. 

It is upon the general subject of the Administration 
running the Churches, as developed in the order from 
the War Department creating Bishop Ames Bishop of a 
Military Department, and authorizing him to take pos- 
session of the Methodist churches of Missouri, Tennessee 
and the Gulf States. It says : 

" Here we have, in optima forma, the commencement 
of Federal interference with religious affairs ; and this 
interference occurs in cities and districts where war has 


ceased, and even in States, like Missouri, which have 
never joined the secession movement. 

u Doubtless the Federal Government has the right to 
exercise the utmost rigor of the law against rebel 
clergymen, as well as against all other criminal citizens; 
nay, it may even close churches in districts under mili- 
tary law when these churches are abused for political 
purposes ; but this is the utmost limit to which military 
power may go. Every step beyond this is an arbitrary 
attack upon the constitutionally guaranteed right of 
religious freedom, and upon the fundamental law of 
the American Eepublican Government — separation of 
Church and State. The violation of the Constitution 
committed in the appointment of a Military Bishop — 
one would be forced to laugh if the affair were not so 
serious in principle — is so much the more outrageous 
and wicked, as it is attempted in States which, like Mis- 
souri, have never separated from the Union, and in 
which all the departments of civil administration are in 
regular activity. 

"This order of the War Department is the commence- 
ment of State and Federal interference in the affairs of 
the Churches. It is not a single military suspension or 
banishment order, which might be exceptional and for 
a temporary purpose. It is not the act of a General 
who, sword in hand, commands the priest to pray for 
him, as we read of in times long ago. It is far more. 
It is an administrative decree of the Federal Govern- 
ment, appropriating Church property, regulating Church 
communities, and installing Bishops. A similar order 
has been issued for the Baptist Church of the South. 

" If this is the commencement, where will the end be ? 


The pretense that it is merely a proceeding against dis- 
loyal clergymen will deceive nobody. Bad actions 
have never wanted good pretenses. "With the same 
right with which the Secretary of War makes Bishop 
Ames chief of a Church in the South he may also inter- 
fere in the affairs of all other Churches, or even dissolve 
any Church at pleasure. We ask again, Where is the 
end to be ? and what principle of American constitu- 
tional law will remain if freedom of religion and of 
conscience is at the mercy of any commander of a mili- 
tary post V 




Philosophy of Martyrdom — Living Martyrs — Names Made Im- 
mortal by Persecution — Martyrs of Missouri — Difference 
Between Martyrs for the Testimony of Jesus, only Questions 
of Time and Place — The Spirit the Same Everywhere — Causes 
— Explanatory Remarks — Rev. James M. Proctor Arrested 
Coming out of the Pulpit — Connection with the M. E. Churcfi, 
South, his only Offense — Kept in Prison for Weeks, then Released 
— Rev. Marcus Arrington — Chaplain — Insulted — Kept in Alton 
Prison — Rev. John McOlothUn — Petty Persecution and Tyranny 
— Rev. James Penn — Meeting Broken Up — Driven from His own 
Churches by a Northern Methodist Preacher Leading an Armed 
Mob — Persecution — Prayer. 

Men die, but truth is immortal. The workmen are 
buried, but the work goes on. Institutions pass away, 
but the principles of which they were the incarnation 
live forever. The Way, the Truth and the Life u was 
manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of 
angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the 
world, received up into glory." 

Incarnate Innocence was "despised and rejected of 
men." The Manger, the Garden, the Cross, are but 
different aspects of the life and light of men, and illus- 
trate the history of the "Man of Sorrows." The dis- 
ciple is not above his Lord, nor the servant better than 
his Master, and if such things were done in the green 
tree, what hope is there for the dry ? 

There are many living martyrs. Death is not a 
necessary condition of martyrdom. The souls of many 


martyrs have not yet reached their resting place "under 
the altar." They have met the conditions of martyr 
dom in the garden of agony without reaching the cross. 
Some men, who still live, have suffered more for Christ 
and his Church than many who have ended their suffer- 
ings with their lives. Not the nature but the cause of 
suffering imparts to it the moral quality and the virtues of 
martyrdom. "Blessed are they which are persecuted for 
righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." 
Many suffer and die, but not " for righteousness' 
sake," and very many " are persecuted for righteous- 
ness' sake" who still live. The grave does not limit the 
roll of martyrs. Eobinson and Headlee, and G-lanville 
and Wollard may have suffered less for righteousness' 
sake than Cleavland, Breeding, M' Anally, Penn, Duvall, 
Spencer, Rush and many others who still live to bear 
witness to the truth. True, it is something to sacrifice life 
for a principle and a cause — to seal the testimony with 
the blood. Moral heroism can reach no higher form, nor 
express itself in no more exalted type. Its purest fire 
goes out and its sublimest consecration culminates in 
the life blood of the martyr. Many a noble spirit has 
been offered up in the sacrifice and service of faith, and, 
like Isaac, bound hand and foot upon the altar, with the 
fatal knife glittering and gleaming in the upraised hand of 
the executioner, yet has been rescued by the interposing 
voice, when perfect faith stood vindicated in the complete 
consecration. "Was not Abraham, our father, justified 
by works when he had offered Isaac, his son, upon 
the altar ?" As much so as if the knife had been driven 
to his heart and the fires had consumed his body. Yet 
Abraham's faith was vindicated by his works, and Isaac 


lived to perpetuate the story of his offering. St. Paul 
says : " For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we 
are accounted as sheep for the slaughter." And again : 
"I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ 
Jesus our Lord, I die daily." He was a living martyr, 
and many Apostles and righteous men have, like him, 
been a killed all the day long" and "die daily." 

Historical facts in support of the position taken are 
neither wanting nor few, and the roll of living and dead 
martyrs in Missouri, now to be recorded in these pages, 
will vindicate the position and illustrate the annals of 
religious persecution with a chapter but little removed 
from the horrors of the Spanish Inquisition, and the 
persecutions of the Yaudois Christians and Waldenses 
under Francis L, Henry II., Catherine De Medicis and 
other notable instruments of power in France, which 
culminated in the Massacre of St. Bartholomew. 

Many names have been given a fame as enduring as 
the virtues they were made to illustrate, by the force and 
iire and fact of persecution, which otherwise would have 
perished from the earth. And the cause for which they 
were persecuted has been given a sanctity in the hearts 
and a power over the lives of men which otherwise it 
could not have received. A name however obscure, and 
a character however humble, become illustrious despite 
of history when associated with persecution, suffering 
and death, for a principle and a cause which invest hu- 
manity with the purer and higher types of intellectual, 
moral and religious life. Around such names the di- 
vinest principles crystallize, and by such characters the 
deepest and purest fountains of humanity are touched. 
Hampden, and Russell, and Howard, and Sidney, and 


Eliot, and Brainard, and Wilberforce, and Martin, and 
others who sacrificed all for the political, mental and 
moral enfranchisement of their race, have made them- 
selves immortal, as their names are enshrined in the 
deepest heart of our nature. They will live forever in 
the cause for which they suffered. So, too, many of less 
note have been given a fame as enduring as columns of 
brass, and they will be handed down to posterity with- 
out the factitious aid of monuments of marble or pyra- 
mids of granite. 

Profane history, philosophy and poetry may treat the 
martyr for the truth cavalierly or ignore his claims 
altogether, while they panegyrize his executioner. Yet 
he will live in the hearts of men, ennoble the virtues of 
men, illustrate the heroism of men, and thrill the purest 
souls of men with life and immortality after the names 
of those who despised and rejected him have perished 
in eternal forgetfulness. 

The sweet-spirited Cowper has anticipated this fact 
and put his more than poetic conception into the most 
expressive and poetic language : 

"A patriot's blood may earn indeed, 
And for a time insure to his loved land 
The sweets of liberty and equal laws ; 
But martyrs struggle for a brighter prize, 
And win it with more pain. Their blood is shed 
In confirmation of the noblest claim — 
Our claim to feed upon immortal truth, 
To walk with God. to be divinely free, 
To soar and to anticipate the skies." 

The martyrs of Missouri, though unknown to fame 
and unambitious of distinction, have, in their humble, 
unostentatious, quiet way, suffered as keenly and as 


severely as any others. They have taken the spoiling 
of their goods as joyfully, " counted all things but loss 
for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus 
the Lord," " counted not their lives dear unto them- 
selves so that they might finish their course with joy 
and the ministry which they have received of the Lord. 
Jesus to testify the gospel of the grace of God," and in all 
their sufferings for righteousness' sake have entered as 
full}- into the spirit of the Master, even in sealing their 
testimony with their blood, as did John Calos, Nicholas 
Burton, Paul Clement, John Huss, Jerome of Prague, 
Bishops Latimer and Eidley, Archbishop Cramner, or 
any other of the long roll of distinguished martyrs. 

The martyrs of Missouri may not occupy a place as 
high as others on the scrolls of fame, yet it is only a 
difference of time and country. It is the meridian of 
the ninteenth, instead of the fifteenth, sixteenth or 
seventeenth century. We are in Missouri, one of the 
United States of America, instead of Madrid, the valleys 
of Piedmont and Savoy, or Paris, or Italy, or Bohemia, 
or Turin, or London, or any other country or place 
where the blood of the martyrs has been shed for the 
testimony of Jesus. The spirit of persecution is the 
same, and the high sense of consecration to God and 
fidelity to Jesus that led the old martyrs to the rack and 
the stake have not been wanting in the ministers of the 
gospel in Missouri. The spirit, the heroism, the faith, 
the zeal, the devotion, were all here; and but for the 
remaining sense of enlightened Christianity that had 
been so long fostered by the genius of our free institu- 
tions, and the power it still exercised upon the public 
mind, the rack, the stake and all the horrible fires of 


the Inquisition would have been here also. The absence 
of these and other instruments of torture from the history 
of martyrdom in Missouri is due to other causes than the 
spirit and design of the authors and agents of religious 
persecution. The spirit was willing, but the cause and 
the occasion were wanting. Mobocracy sometimes in- 
vented a cause and made an occasion. The victim was 
found and offered without an altar. In such cases brutal 
cruelty was scarcely softened by religious refinement. 

Some suffered for intermeddling with paiiy politics ; 
some for declining to take the oath of loyalty to the 
Government, as ministers; others for refusing to preach 
under a flag ; others because they did not pray for the 
destruction of all rebels ; others for expressing sympa- 
thy for one side or the other; others because they were 
born and brought up in the South; others, still, for de- 
clining to sanction the wrongs and outrages committed 
upon defenseless citizens, and helpless women and 
children, and still others because they were ministers 
and belonged to a certain ecclesiastical body. 

How far these various considerations were only pre- 
texts or occasions can not now be determined, other than 
by the analysis of the state of society heretofore given 
and the real animus of these persecutions. 

The following instances of persecution are furnished, 
in substance, as they came into the hands of the author. 
Nothing is added, and nothing material to the facts is 
omitted. In some instances the phraseology is a little 
changed, more to secure a uniform tone and spirit 
throughout the work than to alter the sense ; but ma- 
terial facts are nowhere sacrificed in the narratives of 
others, even to the author's taste. "Where it can be 


done, the language of each one's own history is retained; 
but where only the facts and dates have been furnished, 
they are put up with the strictest regard for truth and 
consistency. The reader will see from the narratives 
themselves that it is impossible to observe chronological 
order. And, indeed, the classification of subjects makes 
it necessary to break the narrative of individual perse- 
cutions where it can be done, that each individual may 
illustrate the several stages of this remarkable history. 
For instance, some men were persecuted during the 
continuance of the war, and then again under the appli- 
cation of the "test oath" of the new Constitution. 
These, it is true, are but different aspects and stages of 
the same system of proscription and persecution, yet 
the nature and bearing of events require separate treat- 
ment where it can be done. The purposes of history 
can only be served by proper classifications and dis- 
tinctions. The following narratives of persecution are 
fully authenticated by official records and responsible 

The trials and persecutions of ministers of the gospel 
varied somewhat with the locality. In some parts of 
the State ministers were partially exempt from the in- 
fluence and power of lawless men, while in other sec- 
tions property, liberty and life were all at the mercy 
of irresponsible mobs. 

The following statement is furnished by the minister 
himself. He has long been a faithful, earnest, exemp- 
lary member of the St. Louis Annual Conference, M. E. 
Church, South. Few men have stood higher in the 
ranks of the itinerant ministry in Missouri or done 
more faithful service than 


The Eev. James M. Proctor. 

He says: "I was arrested by TV". Hall, at Draby's 
chapel, on Sabbath, July 6, 1862. Hall, with his com- 
pany, reached the chapel before me, and had the ' stars 
and stripes' placed just above the church door. He 
said that he had been informed that I would not preach 
under the Union flag. After preaching, and just as I 
was coming out at the door, near which he had taken 
his position, he accosted me and said, 'You are my 
prisoner/ He trembled like an aspen leaf. I said to 
him, ' "Why this emotion, sir ? Show yourself a man, 
and do your duty.' He replied, ' I hate to arrest you, 
but I am bound to do my duty.' He said I must go 
with him to his father's then, and the following morn- 
ing he would take me to headquarters at Cape Gir- 
ardeau. I could not well go with him that night, as I 
had been caught in the rain that morning, and had to 
borrow a dry suit on the road, which I was under obli- 
gations to return that evening. 

" After some parley, he granted me permission to re- 
port at the Cape in a few days, which I did promptly, to 
Col. Ogden, then Provost-Marshal. Col. Ogden paroled 
me to report at his headquarters every two or three 
weeks. On the 29th of September, 1862, I reported to 
him the fifth and last time, when I was tongue-lashed 
at a fearful rate by Lieut.-Col. Peckham of the 29th Mo. 
regiment, and by him sent to the guard-house. 

"I asked this irate Colonel if the front of my offending 
was not my connection with the M. E. Church, South. 
He replied, 'Yes, sir; and the man who will belong to 
that Church, after she has done the way she has, ought 


to be in prison during the war; and I will imprison you, 
sir, during the war.' ' It is a hard sentence for such an 
offense/ I said. He replied, ( 1 can't help it, sir; all 
such men as you are must be confined so that they can 
do no harm/ 

" I remained in the guard-house, at the Cape until 
Thursday, October 2, 1862, when — in company with 
thirteen other prisoners, three of whom died in a few 
weeks — I was sent to Gratiot street military prison, St. 
Louis. In this prison I met several very worthy minis- 
ters of different denominations, and also Brother J. S. 
Boogher and two of his brothers, nobler men than whom 
I have not found any where in the world. 

"October 20, 1862, I was released on parole, there 
being no crime alleged against me. The little man who 
first arrested me was a Northern Methodist. He wrote 
out and preferred two charges against me, which were 
so frivolous that the officers in St. Louis would not in- 
vestigate them. I furnish them here as items of curi- 
osity, as follows : 

" ' 1. He, the said J. M. Proctor, threatened to hang 
Mr. Lincoln. 

"'2. He said that the Federal soldiers were horse 

"After my release from Gratiot street prison, St. 
Louis, I went to the town of Jackson, where I was 
again arrested at the special instigation of a Northern 
Methodist preacher named Liming. I continued to 
preach during and after my imprisonment. "When the 
notorious test oath was inaugurated I continued to 
preach, and was indicted three times before Judge 
Albert Jackson, of Cape Girardeau county. Revs. D. H. 


Murphy and A. Munson were also indicted for the same 

" I never took the test oath, nor any oath of allegiance 
during the war. It was plain to all that the Northern 
Methodists were our worst enemies during that long 
and cruel war." 

It is only necessary to add that Mr. Proctor remained 
at home when permitted, attending to his legitimate 
calling during the war as a minister, and was no partisan 
in the strife — a peaceable, law-abiding citizen, and an 
humble, inoffensive minister of the gospel. As he was 
informed, "the front of his offending was his connection 
with the M. E. Church, South," while it seems that both 
the instigators and instruments of his arrest and im- 
prisonment were members of the M. E. Church, North. 
Proscription and persecution do not always hesitate in 
the presence of opportunity. 

Eev. Marcus Arrington. 

It is sad to record the following details of suffering 
inflicted upon one of the oldest, most useful and honored 
members of the St. Louis Conference, M. E. Church, 
South; a man who for many years has been an humble, 
exemplary and influential member of the Conference, 
who occupied a high position in the confidence of the 
Church, and has been intrusted with high and responsible 
positions in her courts and councils. No man, perhaps, 
of any Church has stood higher in the esteem of all men 
of all Churches in Southwest Missouri, where he has so 
long lived and labored, than Marcus Arrington. Let 
him tell in his own way the story of his sufferings : 

u When the troubles commenced, in the spring of 1861, 


I was traveling the Springfield Circuit, St. Louis Con- 
ference. I was very particular not to say anything, 
either publicly or privately, that would indicate that I 
was a partisan in the strife. I tried to attend to my 
legitimate work as a traveling preacher. 

"But after the war commenced, because I did not ad- 
vocate the policy of the party in power, I was reported as 
a secessionist, and in the midst of the public excitement 
it was vain to attempt to counteract the report. 

" At the earnest solicitation of divers persons, I took 
the oath of loyalty to the Government. This, it was 
thought, would be sufficient. But we were mistaken. 

" Soon after this, my life was threatened by those who 
were in the employ of the Federal Government. But 
they were, as I verily believe, providentially prevented 
from executing their threat. 

" After the battle of Oak Hills, or Wilson's Creek, 
July 10, 1861, it became my duty to do all I could for 
the relief of the sick and wounded, and because I did 
this I was assured that I had violated my oath of allegi- 
ance. I was advised by Union men, so-called, that it 
would be unsafe for me to fall into the hands of Federal 
soldiers. Believing this to be true, when General Fre- 
mont came to Springfield, I went to Arkansas, as I 
think almost any man would have done under the cir- 

"While in Arkansas, I met Bro. W. G. Caples, who 
was acting Chaplain to General Price. He requested 
me to take a chaplaincy in the army, informing me at 
the time that, by an agreement between Generals Fre- 
mont and Price, all men who had taken the oath of 
loyalty as I did were released from its obligations. 


"In December, 1861, 1 was appointed by Gen. McBride 
Chaplain of the 7th Brigade, Missouri State Guard. In 
this capacity I remained with the army until the battle of 
Pea Eidge, March 7 and 8, 1862. On the second day of 
this battle, while in the discharge of my duty as Chap- 
lain, I was taken prisoner. Several Chaplains taken at 
the same time were released on the field, but I was re- 
tained. I was made to walk to Sj^ringfield, a distance 
of 80 miles. "We remained in Springfield one day and 
two nights, and whilst many prisoners who had previ- 
ously taken the oath as I had were paroled to visit their 
families, I was denied the privilege. 

" We were then started off to Eolla, and although I 
had been assured that I would be furnished transporta- 
tion, it was a sad mistake, and I had to walk until I 
literally gave out. What I suffered on that trip I can 
not describe. "When we reached Eolla I was publicly 
insulted by the Commander of the Post. 

" From Eolla we were sent to St. Louis on the cars, 
lodged one night in the old McDowell College, and the 
next day sent to Alton, 111. 

""Whilst 1 was in Alton prison a correspondent of the 
Republican, writing over the name of 'Leon/ repre- 
sented me as a 'thief and a perjured villain V 

" I was kept in Alton prison until Aug. 2, 1862, when 
I was released by a General Order for the release of all 

" I then went to St. Louis, and thence South, by way 

of Memphis, Tenn., into exile. I would have returned 

to Missouri after the war closed but for the restrictions 

put upon ministers of the gospel by the new Constitution. 

" Eternity alone will reveal what I have suffered in 


exile. The St. Louis Conference is properly my home, 
and her preachers have a warm place in my affections. 
They are very near my heart. May they ever be suc- 

Rev. Mr. Arrington pines for his old home and friends, 
and few men have a deeper hold upon the hearts of the 
people in Missouri. Thousands would welcome him to 
warm hearts and homes after these calamities are over- 

Rev. John McGlothlin. 

As a specimen of petty local persecution the case of 
Rev. J. McGlothlin, a worthy local preacher of the M. 
E. Church, South, who has long stood high in that part 
of the State where he resides, will be sufficient for this 

It was with some reluctance that he yielded to the 
demands of history enough to furnish the following 
facts. He is a modest man and shrinks from notoriety. 

In 1862 he was residing in Ray county, Mo., when 
Major Biggers, the Commander of the Post at Richmond, 
issued an order that no minister of the gospel should 
preach who did not carry with him the Union flag. A 
few days after the order came out Mr. McGlothlin was 
called upon to go to Knoxville, Caldwell county, to pro- 
cure suitable burial clothing for a Mrs. Tilford, a widow, 
who died in his neighborhood, as he was the only man 
available for that service. After the purchases were 
made and he was ready to return, a Captain Tiffin, of 
Knoxville, stepped up and asked if he had " reported." 
He answered in the negative, and convinced the Captain 
that there was no order requiring him to report, as he 
had license to preach. The officer then asked him if he 


had a "flag." He told him he had not. "Will you get 
one?" ""No" said he, "I will recognize no State or 
military authority to prescribe qualifications for the 
work of the ministry." The officer at once arrested 
him. Mr. McGrlothlin acquainted Capt. Tiffin at once 
with the peculiar character of his business in Knoxville, 
and the necessity of his speedy return, offering at the 
same time his parole of honor to report to him* at any 
time and place he might designate. This he promptly 
refused, and the officer said that he would ride out a 
part of the way with him. When they arrived within 
a few miles of the house where the dead lay waiting 
interment, the officer pressed a boy into service and sent 
the burial clothes to their destination, after detaining 
them three or four hours on the way. 

The minister was not released, even to attend the 
funeral service, but was kept in close confinement, din- 
nerless, supperless, bedless and comfortless. 

The next day, with over twenty others, he was taken 
to Kichmond and confined in the Fair Grounds and in 
the old College building for five weeks, and then un- 
conditionally released. The only charge they could 
bring against him was that he would not take the oath 
of allegiance, give bond in the sum of $1,000 for his 
good behavior, and buy a flag to carry about with him 
as an evidence of his loyalty and a symbol of authority 
to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

Few instances of petty persecution in the exercise of 
a little brief authority can surpass this. It needs no 
comment, except to add that the minister who was thus 
made a victim of the narrowest and meanest spitefulness 
was a high-toned gentleman of unblemished character, 


against whom even the petty military officers and their 
spies could never raise an accusation. 

Eev. James Penn. 

This venerable minister and member of the Missouri 
Annual Conference, M. E. Church, South, was the sub- 
ject of a peculiar class of trials during the war. Mr. 
Penn is one of the oldest and one of the best men in 
the itinerant ministry in Missouri. 

He has furnished to the ministry four sons, all of 
whom are worthy and useful men. While the father 
has given his life and his children to.the work of the 
ministry, it is peculiarly gratifying to the Church and 
their co-laborers of the Missouri Conference that, up to 
this time, no moral taint has ever rested upon a single 
member of the family. 

So long known and so highly esteemed by the people 
of the State generally, it was hoped — vainly hoped — 
that at least he would escape the fiery ordeal. JSTo one 
at all acquainted with his spirit and character can 
ever believe aught against him of harm to any human 
government or human being. During a long, eventful 
life he has been a man eminently pure in spirit, and 
singularly devoted to his one work. In that work he 
has had no divided heart, or head, or life. 

His sons follow in his footsteps — worthy sons of an 
honored sire — and as such it is not altogether an un- 
meaning pun which has so generally designated them 
" Gold Penns." 

But it is still true that "they that would live godly 
in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." It would be 


wrong not to let this honored servant of God tell his 
own story. 

" First. I was arrested in August, 1862, and carried 
to Keokuk, Iowa, and there detained for about a week. 
There being no well founded charges against me I was 

u Second. In August, 1863, I held a meeting in 
Williamstown, Mo. There was present at that meeting 
a minister of the M. E. Church, whose name I believe 
was Moody. On Sunday morning, during prayer meet- 
ing, this man, while we were kneeling in prayer, arose 
and began to read in a very loud tone of voice. The 
people got off their knees. The man who had thus dis- 
turbed an unoffending company of praying men and 
women was armed, as were some fifteen others whom 
he had brought with him. I walked toward the door 
and the people followed me and took a position in the 
street. I then preached to a large concourse of people, 
the armed minister and his valiant company retaining 
possession of the house. I continued the meeting until 
the next Sabbath, when this preacher with his armed 
band came again and drove us out of the house the 
second time. I preached out of doors, as on the preced- 
ing Sabbath. The meeting resulted in much good, there 
being about forty accessions to the M. E. Church, 

u On another occasion flags were brought and placed 
on and around the pulpit, and a company of armed men 
sat near to prevent any one from taking them down. 
Seeing that this would not deter us from a discharge of 
Christian duty, a lot of wicked women raised a fight 
and fought like savages, so we were compelled to leave 


the house and ceased to preach at that place. Moody 
was asked why he did so, and his reply was : "Because 
I can." He is now, I believe, a minister in good stand- 
ing in the M. E. Church, but many responsible people 
regard him as a very bad man. 

u At Winchester, Mo., we had a very good house of 
worship, but they ran us out, as they did at "Williams- 
town, until our own people were unwilling to attend 
divine service in the town. Then the house was almost 
destroyed, so that there we had no place in which to 

a They seized our house at Lagrange, a Mr. Stewart 
and others of the M. E. Church being the chief actors 
in this matter. After three years they relinquished 
their hold upon this splendid house. 

"In addition to all this, I have suffered personal 
wrongs, in various ways, at the hands of these people. 
But I have tried to keep a conscience void of offense to- 
ward God and men. Their wrong-doing is upon them- 
selves. I leave them to be judged by him who is too 
wise to err and too good to do wrong. May he forgive 
the wrong done." 

This simple narrative speaks volumes, and needs 
neither note nor comment. The Rev. Colonel Moody, 
who figured so conspicuously in the persecutions above 
detailed, it is said, read on the occasion of the first dis- 
turbance of Mr. Penn's prayer meeting from Gal. iii. 1 : 
u O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye 
should not obey the truth ?" &c. 

It is a singular fact that the ministers of the M. E. 
Church, North, were conspicuous from first to last in 
the persecutions of the ministers of the M. E. Church, 


South ; and, indeed, all other ministers who were under 
the ban of the Federal authorities. There was not only 
a bold scheme devised by Bishops Simpson and Ames to 
possess themselves of the property of the M. E. Church, 
South, through military authority, as the rightful booty 
of Northern Methodist conquest, but every minister 
and member who had position and power in the army, 
or who could evoke the military power, seemed to con- 
sider themselves specially commissioned to seize the 
property and exterminate the very existence of Southern 




Ministers of other Churches in the Fellowship of Suffering and on the 
Rolls of Martyrdom — Rev. Wrn. Cleavelatid Arrested foy Preach- 
ing- in a Rehel Camp — Imprisoned and Insulted — Made to Pray for 
Mr. Lincoln on a Loyal Cannon — Rev. Captain Cox, a Northern 
Methodist Preacher, his Persecutor — Other Indignities — Indicted, 
Arrested and Arraigned as a Common Felon for Preaching without 
taking the "Test Oath" — Rev. Jesse Bird Arrested, Silenced and 
Banished — Losses, Exposure and Hardships of his Family — Re- 
turns — Arrested and put in Jail for Preaching without taking the 
"Test Oath" — Public Indignation — The Most Virulent Persecu- 
tors Subsequently Elevated to the Highest Civil Offices. 

The ministers of the M. E. Church, South, were not 
the only sufferers. Persecution ma^ 7 sometimes be ex- 
clusive and exceptional, but oftener it is indiscriminate. 
The class of persons marked, or " spotted," for proscrip- 
tion and persecution was not confined to any one 
Church. Eeligious creeds were not so much involved 
as sectarian domination and sectional hatred. To ex- 
terminate, or expel from the State, that class of men 
who had not received their tone and type from New 
England, or had not fallen in heartily with the loyal 
religion and the religious loyalty, seemed to be a settled 

It will be conceded that the ministers of the Methodist 
Church, South, were the greater sufferers, for reasons 
heretofore given; but to deny others who sacrificed and 
suffered nobly in the same cause a conspicuous place in 
the history of these stirring times would be both un- 


generous and unjust. Many of the noblest martyrs of 
this period were connected with other Churches, and 
heroically and grandly sustained the moral heroism of 
the Missouri ministry. Common sufferings have sancti- 
fied the common fellowship and softened the asperities 
of sectarian feeling. It has measurably fused the re- 
ligious heart and diffused the religious charity. Such 
men as Cleaveland, Duval, McPheeters, Wollard and 
others, are. welcomed to the fellowship of suffering and 
the rolls of martyrdom. 

The following statement is inserted as written. The 
language might be softened and the spirit toned down 
to advantage, but a prohibition only secures the facts ; 
they can not be left out. 

Case of the Eev. Wm. Cleaveland, a Missionary 


" I write as a witness for God and his Church, with- 
out fee or reward, to vindicate truth and to furnish a 
correct history of facts concerning myself and my acts 
which can neither be denied nor gainsaid. 

"'Nothing shall I extenuate, 
Nor aught set down in malice.' 

"I am a minister of the gospel of the Missionary Bap- 
tist order, and pastor of the churches at Emerson, in 
Marion county, and Monticello and Mount Gilead, in 
Lewis county, Missouri ; and nearly sixty years of age. 
In 1862, whilst attending as a member of an Association 

of the Baptist churches of , Col. Martin A. Green, 

commanding a detachment of Missouri troops in sympa- 
thy with the Southern cause, encamped a mile or two 
off, and despatched a messenger requesting the Associa- 


tion to appoint a minister to hold religious services and 
preach to his regiment on the Sabbath day. I was as- 
signed to this duty by the Association, and performed 
it to the best of my humble ability. Perfect order pre- 
vailed, much feeling was exhibited, and I received 
compliments and other expressions of gratitude above 

" Eeturning to my home from the Association, after 
its close, I was arrested in the presence of my family 
by an armed force commanded by an officer in Federal 
uniform, marched off hurriedly to ' headquarters' in the 
city of Hannibal, and there confined a close prisoner in 
a filthy, cheerless hovel denominated a l guard-house/ 
without fire to warm me, a bed to lie upon, or food to 
sustain nature, until my masters chose to permit my 
friends to furnish me supplies. Repeated efforts were 
made by my relations, brethren of the Church and 
others, to communicate with me and furnish me neces- 
saries, but all in vain. The subalterns dressed in uni- 
form, who, in the character of sentinels, haunted me like 
spectres, appeared much gratified to have jurisdiction 
around, and haughtily domineered, ridiculed, sneered 
and blustered as if to torture me into submission and 
humble me as in the dust. Meantime I put my trust in 
God, and continued ' instant in prayer.' Somehow I 
felt an extraordinary assurance that He whose right 
arm brought deliverance to Daniel, and to Paul and 
Silas, would rescue me from the snare of the enemy. 
About nine o'clock on the succeeding Monday morning 
a Northern Methodist preacher calling himself 'Captain 
Cox/ with a squad of armed men, entered my miserable 
and filthy prison, and, with an air of much authority, 


commanded me to march forthwith into the presence of 
Col. David Moore, who demanded that I immediately 
appear before him as commander of the garrison. 

u Glad of any change in my gloomy situation, I arose 
and started, closely followed by my reverend perse- 
cutor, 'Captain Cox/ and his insolent nryrmidons, until 
ordered to 'halt' in front of the quarters of the com- 
manding officer. Being ushered in, I found Colonel 
Moore surrounded by an ill-mannered, ruffian-like multi- 
tude, who stared and sneered as if I were a curiosity on 
exhibition. The salutation of the commander was, 
'Are you a rebel V I answered that I had rebelled 
against the empire of Satan many years before and in- 
tended to continue in that warfare while life should last. 
' The hell and damnation you have !' exclaimed the gen- 
tlemanly commander, in a loud tone of voice. I then 
said, ' I am a minister of the gospel, sir, and it is my 
business to make war against the kingdom of Satan. 
This, and this alone, is my occupation and my daily 
employment, and this alone I expect to do.' 'Are you 
a Southern man V asked he. 'I was born in the South, 
raised and educated there, and my sympathies irresistibly 
lead me in that direction. Custom, tradition, my con- 
struction of the teachings of the Bible and ancient and 
modern history convinced me and established my belief 
to the effect that the institutions of the South were 
morally, socially, politically and religiously right, and I 
could not conscientiously say that I was not a Southern 
man/ ' Other men control their sympathies/ said he, 
'why can you not do the same and harmonize with the 
North as well as the South V I frankly replied that I 
would not believe the man that would tell me so. Habit 


and education made a man's opinions, and the convic- 
tions of a lifetime of three score years could not be 
changed in an hour. ' How do you like old Abe V said 
he. 'In some respects well enough; in others not so 
well. On the whole, I don't indorse him as a President.' 
'The hell you don't!' said he, whilst his surrounding 
admirers screamed with laughter. 'Did you pray for 
them rebels?' said he. 'Yes, sir.' 'Did you preach to 
them?' 'Yes, sir.' 'How long were you in Green's 
camp ?' ' Two or three hours, perhaps. ' ' "Why did you 
go there and pray and preach to them damned rebels?' 
said hC. ' Colonel Green sent a request to our Associa- 
tion, then in session near his camping ground, for a min- 
ister to be sent to preach to his men on the Sabbath day, 
and the Association deputized me to the task, all of 
which facts would appear in our published proceedings.' 
'Damned glad you were to go, no doubt; and since you 
love praying for rebels so well, I will make you do a 
little loyal praying.' 'As to loyal or disloyal praying, I 
have no knowledge, but being commanded to pray for 
all men I endeavor to do so everywhere, lifting up holy 
hands without wrath and doubting.' I then demanded 
to know why I was there a prisoner; what was my of- 
fense, and who was my accuser. He answered in a vio- 
lent and spiteful manner, that 'for preaching and pray- 
ing for rebels in a rebel camp he had ordered my arrest, 
and that as a punishment for treason I should remain 
in the guard house a prisoner, on coarse fare, for nine 
days, and should offer each day a public prayer for Old 
Abe.' Having grown impatient at the abuse and insults 
of which I had been the subject so long, I replied : ' Col. 
Moore, I am told you have a praying wife ; and I thank 


God this day that I am counted worthy to be pun- 
ished for preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ and pray- 
ing for sinners. Sir, I esteem it a privilege and an 
honor, and shall not only pray, as my penance requires, 
for ' Mr. Lincoln/ but shall pray with all my heart for 
all other sinners, especially such as are associated in 
authority with him.' Springing suddenly to his feet, 
'take him/ said he, and with much coarse abuse added, 
( convey him under guard back to the guard house, im- 
prison him, give him prisoner's rations, keep sentinels 
around him ; and Captain Cox, I shall look to you to see 
this order executed/ ' Hurried back to the stench and 
filth of my prison house, accompanied by my armed guard, 
I remained until the next morning, when I was sum- 
moned to march out, and followed by several armed men 
with fixed bayonets and was conducted to a spot where 
the cannon were stationed. The regiment had been 
drawn up and formed into an irregular hollow square, 
in mockery. Many of the officers slunk away, while 
others stood and incited the men to giggle and perform 
antics to make the scene ludicrous and mortifying. As 
my divine Master, like a lamb before its shearers, was 
dumb, so I opened not my mouth. In an exultant and 
authoritative manner, the Eev. Capt. Cox, my loving 
Christian brother, a preacher of the Northern Methodist 
Church, as before stated, commanded me to ' mount that 
cannon and offer prayer for Mr. Lincoln, in obedience 
to orders, as a penance for praying in a rebel camp/ 

" Being an old man, and weighing between two and 
three hundred pounds ; having had scarcely an hour's 
rest for several days and nights; having had no change 
of clothing and no privilege of ablutions of any kind, I 


felt very badly, and with difficulty climbed to the top 
of the cannon-carriage, and there lifted up my heart and 
hands and voice to Jehovah in humble, fervent prayer. 
I felt greatly lifted up, much revived and encouraged, 
and my faith seemed as it were to grasp the very horns 
of the altar. The glory of the Lord shone forth, the 
Shekinah appeared to come down and rest upon the 
camp, and fear came upon the men. The pious rejoiced, 
the wicked were ashamed, and astonishment pervaded 
the scene. At the conclusion of my prayer, still stand- 
ing in the ridiculous attitude I was made to occupy upon 
the cannon, I opened my eyes and looking around upon 
what had been my fun-making and pleasure-seeking 
audience of soldiers and citizens, I discovered many 
weeping, others hurrying away in disorder, and even the 
blasphemous Colonel Moore was said to have shed tears. 
Knowing I had committed no offense against the lawir 
of G-od or man, and that my blessed Master had been 
stoned, spit upon, whipped with cords, dressed in mock 
royalty, crowned with thorns and driven through the 
public streets in derision for the sport of the mob, I 
took courage and hoped for the best. ' If they did those 
things in the green tree, what might they not do in the 
dry V The weapons of my warfare were not carnal. 
Yet these wicked men, actuated by the same malignant 
spirit which prompted their prototypes to lay violent 
hands on the Son of God, seized me, an humble and 
obscure preacher of righteousness, guilty of no offense, 
and to gratify their malignity, dragged me around, 
followed by soldiers with muskets and bayonets, ex- 
posed me to ridicule and attempted to force me to make 
a mockery of religion, and thus (as they hoped) bring 


the Church into dishonor and disgrace. 'But the ways 
of the Lord are marvelous in our eyes/ for 

" 'Deep in unfathomable mines 
Of never failing skill, 
He treasures up his bright designs 
And works his sovereign will.' 

" Hastened from this scene by the peremptory order 
of my Bev. Brother, Capt. Cox, I was conducted by an 
armed guard back to the filth and stench of the guard- 
house, and there remained, each day going through the 
same blasphemous exhibition, except that I was allowed 
to stand on the ground instead of the cannon to offer up 
my prayer. Many of the soldiers professed repentance, 
and whilst stationed as sentinels around me tendered 
me their sympathies, extended many kindnesses, and 
pledged me that, dying in battle, or when or where 
they might, they would try to meet me in heaven. 
Yerily and of a truth ' the Lord maketh the wrath of 
man to praise him.' 

" Shortly after these events Col. Moore and his com- 
mand were ordered South, where they participated in 
the battle of Shiloh, or Pittsburg Landing, as it is some- 
times called. The regiment was cut to pieces, Colonel 
Moore lost a leg by a shot from a cannon, and his Major, 
Barnabas King, to whose instigation my friends at- 
tributed much of my suffering, was killed. The Eev. 
' Captain Cox' seems to have kept out of harm's way 
on that fearful day, for — now that our homes are made 
a ruin, our land shrouded in mourning, and our dwell- 
ings sad and sorrowful on account of the absence of the 
loved ones who were cruelly murdered in the presence 
and amid the cries and shrieks of wives, mothers and 


babes, as well as the brave who fell in battle — he comes 
again. Not bedecked with the tinsel and trappings of 
authority, to shut up old gray-headed men in loathsome 
prisons, march them around surrounded by bayonets, 
and force them to mount cannons and pray for the 
amusement and sport of the soldiery and the mob for 
preaching the gospel to sinners. Lo ! he comes again 
in the lowly habiliments of Christianity, commissioned 
by the Bishops of the Northern Methodist Church, as 
an accredited minister of that Church, to teach religion 
and preach the gospel amongst us, for which purpose 
the Rev. 'Captain' is now perambulating Marion and 
adjoining counties. 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, 
saith the Lord/ 

"One would suppose that malignity had exhausted it- 
self in the deeds of the foregoing recital. Not so. 
While on business in Hannibal one day, after the fore- 
going had occurred, word came that Col. McDaniel and 
his battalion of the advance guard of the Confederate 
army under General Price was marching in that direc- 
tion ; and, having left my wife and daughter at home 
alone, I called upon Col. H. T. K. Hayward, then in 
command of the post, for a permit to pass out of the 
city and go to my family, who would necessarily be 
much alarmed, and explained my situation. Being a 
member of the Church, a Presbyterian elder, I expected, 
of course, Christianlike courtesy. But, to my surprise, 
I was insolently repelled, vindictively insulted, and 
peremptorily ordered to remain where I was. Stung 
with disappointment and burning with indignation, I 
submitted as patiently as I could, and implored com- 
miseration in the name of my unprotected family. 


Remorseless as a bloodhound and pitiless as a hyena, he 
was inexorable, and forced me to remain until McDaniel 
retired and his scare subsided. At the solicitation of 
leading citizens, he then granted me a permit to go, but 
accompanied the paper with a gruff intimation that the 
issues of life and death were in his grasp, and by the 
nod of his head he 'could have me shot.' Perhaps this 
violence of feeling may have resulted from the fact that 
the brave Colonel Hayward had, at a recent period, 
been captured by a Confederate officer, relieved of his 
watch, his spurs, his purse, his pistols, sword, epaulets, 
horse and equipments, and paroled on his oath and 
pledge of honor, both of which he had violated, and was 
again in arms wreaking vengeance on unarmed and in- 
nocent persons. I make no mention of the particulars 
of the murder of a friendless stranger, laboring under 
delirium tremens, who had just landed from a steamer, 
and was Irv his order shot to death upon the wharf at 
the city of Hannibal. 

" Circumstances indicated that 1113' life and my pro- 
perty were eager objects of the pursuit of this class of 
men. By day or by night, at all hours, and in different 
ways, my family were often disturbed and interrupted 
by them. My wife and daughter were made to perform 
menial service for any number who chose to demand 
it; whilst the filth}* vagabonds, in the uniform of Fed- 
eral soldiers, would ransack the premises and deface, 
destroy and steal anything of value they could find in 
the house or out of it. One night myself and famil}- 
were aroused about twelve o'clock by the heavy tread 
of swift-moving horses, and a loud yell at the door in- 
formed us that soldiers — two of whom, calling themselves 


'Tabor and AYatson, of Capt. John D. Meredith's com- 
pany of the 39th Missouri regiment/ (which Meredith is 
now sheriff of Marion county) — had come with orders 
from their superiors to demand my horse and saddle. 
They said they were in' rapid pursuit of the noted Con- 
federate scout, Bill Anderson, and his command; were 
directed to press into service whatever they needed; 
must have my horse, and intended to give no quarter 
until the last officer and man of the enemy were slain. 
"When this was accomplished they should next turn 
their attention to those who sympathized with the 
rebels, and would clean out every man, woman and 
child, until they had made their lands a desolation and 
their homes a solitude. Intermingling these threats 
with vulgar epithets and bitter denunciation, they 
dashed off; and, as their receding forms faded away in 
the darkness carrying off my fine young horse, my only 
means of reaching my appointments at the different 
churches to preach and perform other ministerial duties, 
a strange and fearful sensation crept over me, as if sad 
events lay buried in the future. The curtain was soon 
lifted. A few days brought the mournful intelligence 
that 'Johnson's battalion had encountered the foe and 
was annihilated.' On the plain, and in full view of the 
city of Centralia, in Boone county, the conflict tran- 
spired, and of all the 'bloody 39th,' as its commander 
boastfully called it, who entered the field that day, not 
a platoon of officers, horses and men escaped death, 
including my poor horse, which, being ridden by a sub- 
altern officer, is said to have sunk down with his rider 
in the midst of the battle to rise no more. 

"In the order of divine providence friends came to my 


relief, and I was enabled, with some difficulty, to pursue 
my work, although much harassed, sorely vexed and 
often cast down by fears without and cares within, for 
my life was often threatened. 

" In common with other brethren who feared God 
rather than Caesar, I was in due time indicted by the 
grand jury of Marion county for preaching the gospel 
to lost sinners without first committing perjury by tak- 
ing a false oath. Arraigned as a felon on my blessed 
Lord's account, I felt honored, for the servant is not 
above his master. I stood at the bar of justice, as he 
stood before Pontius Pilate ; and, although surrounded 
by murderers, burglars, horse-thieves and others of the 
baser sort, I there remained, attending their calls from 
court to court, until for very shame the disgraceful and 
blasphemous scene was closed by the prosecuting law- 
yer, Walter M. Boulware, Esq., dismissing the suit; and 
the Hon. William P. Harrison, now acting as Judge of 
the Court, discharged me and released my securities, 
who had entered into bond for a large amount to keep 
me out of jail. Glory be to God! I am still alive ; and, 
unless sooner taken hence, I feel that there are still 
some years of service in me, which shall be given with 
a willing heart to that cause for which I have suffered, 
and am still willing, if need be, to suffer on. 

" ' God moves in a mysterious way, 
His wonders to perform ; 
He plants his footsteps in the sea, 
And rides upon the storm.' 

"William Cleaveland. 

"Marion County, Mo., May 3, 1869." 

The Eev. Mr. Cleaveland has for many years stood 


high in the part of Missouri where he resides, as an 
orderly, quiet, earnest minister of the gospel, and now 
looks hack on the scene of his persecutions with feel- 
ings that he can scarcely control. His only offense — 
that he preached in a camp of rehel soldiers in obedience 
to the authority of the Association; and for this he was 
not only arrested and imprisoned, but grossly insulted 
and rudely maligned by the permission and authority 
of one who styled himself a minister of the gospel. But 

he told his own story, and it is better without note or 

Eev. Jesse Bird. 

This able and useful minister of the gospel has long 
been a member of the Missouri Annual Conference, M. 
E. Church, South. Few men have stood higher in the 
estimation of his brethren in the ministry or the com- 
munities where his labors have been bestowed. The 
positions filled by him in the pastoral, educational and 
judicial departments of the Church for many years, and 
the ability and fidelity with which he met every responsi- 
bility, attest the confidence of the Church and the high 
appreciation of the Conference of which he is an hon- 
ored member. The spirit that will prompt men to the 
exercise of such petty tyranny as that detailed in Mr. 
Cleaveland's case, and now to be narrated by Mr. Bird, 
must be the spirit of Antichrist. Neither of the gen- 
tlemen was guilty of any civil, political, military or 
moral offense. But hear him : 

"Dear Brother — I see in the Advocate a notice re- 
questing persons to give information of the persecutions 
of ministers of the gospel in Missouri. I send you the 


following very concise statement of facts in my own 

" In the fall of 1861 I was appointed by the President 
of the Missouri Conference to the St. Joseph District. 
On my first round I went to my Quarterly Meeting for 
Eockport Circuit, at Spencer's Chapel, in Atchison 
county. Arriving at the chapel at 11 o'clock Nov. 9, I 
found a pole had been raised by the door with a rope 
fastened to it for the purpose of hoisting a flag. There 
was no one present. I waited a little and saw two men 
approaching. They informed me that a burial was 
going on in the neighborhood, and the preaching was 
postponed till 3 o'clock. 

" In the evening I returned to the church in company 
with a few persons. As we approached the house I saw 
two men hoisting a flag in great haste. Fastening the 
rope as quickly as possible, they ran and hid themselves 
inside a field. Coming up to the house and seeing what 
had been done, I declined going in, stating that I would 
preach under no political flag; that I should not mix 
my religion with politics. I was invited to preach at a 
private house and did so. I was not interrupted again 
until on my second round. 

"On the 6th of Feb., 1862, I commenced a Quarterly 
Meeting at Oregon, Holt county. The meeting went 
on quietly and prosperously until Monday morning, 
when the flag was hoisted over the door of the church. 
I again declined going in for the same reasons. In the 
course of two or three hours I was arrested, cursed and 
abused in various ways and threatened by some men 
who styled themselves solders. I was then sent in 
charge of two young men to Forest City and requested 


to ' take the oath/ which I also declined. But in order 
to get off and out of the hands of the law, I agreed to 
go before a magistrate and take a civil oath to observe 
the Constitution and laws. From Oregon I returned 
home and found a notice in my postoffice at Rochester 
from Ben. Loan, the commander at St. Joseph, requiring 
me to appear before him immediately. I went down 
and inquired for what purpose he had sent for me, when 
he replied: 'You are not to preach anymore in this 
district.' 'Is this all V I inquired. 'You must go and 
take the oath/ he replied. I informed him that I should 
not take the oath ; that he could put me in prison or 
banish me from the State, as he had done others. He 
immediately made out an order for me to leave the State 
within thirty days. This was done in the city of St. 
Joseph, Feb. 14, 1862. I was not restricted to any par- 
ticular bounds. The ground was then covered with 
snow and ice to the depth of six or eight inches. I had 
no money to bear expenses, save about fifty dollars. I 
gave about two prices for a wagon, put what I could in 
it, and leaving my house and crop of corn in the prairie, 
I started on a cold, stormy day (the 20th day of Feb., 
1862,) with my wife in feeble health, to go I knew not 
whither, and that for no other reason than that I was a 
Southern Methodist preacher and would not swear 

" This move made it necessary to sacrifice the grain 
and stock my little boys had worked for, together with 
our furniture and a good portion of my library. I was 
accompanied by my daughter and two little sons, and 
also by Benjamin Bird, his wife and two young children. 
"We started Smith and traveled four days, reaching tho 


river opposite Lexington, and finding the ice giving 
way, and there being no boat, we turned up the river 
to Camden, Ray count}', stopping at Brother Mencfee's, 
a most excellent family, where we remained some three 
or four days. Leaving Camden we went up the bottom 
to a point opposite Napoleon, in Lafayette county, where 
we remained in camp two or three days, when, the ice 
clearing away, we crossed the Missouri river and pro- 
ceeded through cold and storm until we had passed the 
town of Clinton, in Henry county. 

a Here we met some men who told us, as others had the 
day before, that we could not proceed beyond the Osage. 
The Jayhawkers and Home Guards were robbing all 
who attempted to go through. We turned round and 
came back to Lafayette count}', and finding an empty 
house near Greenton, stopped and spent the spring and 
summer there. 

" In a few days I went down to Lexington, saw the 
commander of that post and got a sound cursing for my 
trouble. Returning to my family and finding the people 
of the neighborhood very kind and generous, we re- 
mained until the last of August, when we returned to 
our home in Andrew county. 

"I will say nothing of my trials from that time till 
the close of the war, except that I preached but little. 
A part of this time I was nominally the Presiding Elder 
of St. Joseph District. 

"About Christmas, 1865, I was employed by the Pre- 
siding Elder, II. II. Hedgepeth, to take charge of the 
Savannah Circuit. I commenced my work immediately, 
and continued preaching regularly until my last appoint- 
ment at Savannah, in August, 1866. I had been threat- 


ened at different times during the summer by mobs, and 
sometimes I thought it quite likely T should be put to 
death by the lawless rabble, but I was left unmolested 
until I was about to finish my work on the circuit. On 
Sunday the people exjjected an interruption while I was 
preaching, but all continued quiet till night. While in 
the pulpit I noticed some men come in and whisper to 
each other and go out, and presently return. "When the 
services closed I heard a lady say: 'They are at the 
door.' I quietly walked out and wenl to my room, no- 
body disturbing me. Xext morning I was told they 
were preparing to arrest me. 

"After I had adjusted my affairs, about 10 o'clock, I 
went home. Having proceeded about two hundred 
yards I saw the Deputy Sheriff coming at full sj>eed 
after me. Knowing what it meant, I Btopped till he 
came up. He said he was authorized to arrest me. I 
was taken before a justice of the peace, who had issued 
the warrant for my arrest upon the affidavit of one of 
the party that came into the church on Sunday night. 
The said justice inquired if I pleaded guilty or not guilty 
to the crime of preaching the gospel to the people, in viola- 
tion of the Fundamental Law of the State of Missouri. I 
pleaded guilty. Whereupon the said officer required me 
to give bond for my appearance at the next session of 
the court, which I declined; consequently I was taken 
by the Sheriff of Andrew county and lodged in the jail 
of Buchanan county, in the city of St. Joseph, there be- 
ing no jail in Andrew county. This was done the 27th 
of August, 1866. I remained in prison about three 
hours, when the Sheriff of Buchanan county, accompa- 
nied by Judge Woodson and others of St. Joseph, came 


and opened the door of the jail and let me out. On 
Monday following the Circuit Court of Buchanan county 
came on, and the judge declining to try the ease I gave 
bond for 1113' appearance at the next term of the Circuit 
Court for Andrew county, at which time and place I was 
indicted for preaching the gospel. I took a change of 
venue to Buchanan county, and before the sitting of the 
court the decision of the Supreme Court of the United 
States had set aside the Test Oath, and that ended the 
matter with me. 

"You can make what use of these statements you 
please in the forthcoming history of the persecution in 
Missouri. I should have given names, but I have for- 
gotten most of them. 

" Yours, very truly, Jesse Bird. 

"Plattsburg, Mo., Feb. 3, 1869." 

The account of Mr. Bird's arrest and imprisonment, 
and subsequent indictment for preaching the gospel 
without taking the oath prescribed in the New Constitu- 
tion, could not well be separated from the narrative of 
his other persecutions. 

The author was in St. Joseph when he was brought 
down from Andrew county and lodged in the jail with 
common felons. He had many friends in the community, 
and to see him through the heavy iron grates, classed 
with horse thieves, burglars, murderers and other crimi- 
nals, caused no little popular indignation. Men hurried 
to and fro after attorneys, judges, officers and friends, 
and stood on the corners in animated conversation until 
the public excitement boded no peace. The Sheriff of 
Buchanan county acted prudently and wisely in releas- 
ing him on his verbal parole. No other course would 


have appeased the public indignation or allayed the 
ever-widening and deepening excitement. No threats 
of violence were heard, and yet the indications in the 
public mind could not be mistaken. 

Mr. Bird and the Church will ever be under obliga- 
tions to Hon. Silas Woodson, of St. Joseph, for his 
prompt and efficient attention to the case. He made an 
earnest but ineffectual effort to get the case before Judge 
Heron, then on the Circuit Court bench, on a writ of 
habeas corpus. But the Judge was a little weak-kneed 
and did not wish to damage his prospects for a seat in 
the U. S. Congress, and refused informally to grant a 
writ or have anj'thing to do with the case. 

More will be said on this subject at another time and 
in another connection. 

It may as well be stated here, however, as a note- 
worthy fact, that the military officers and others who 
were the most officious and efficient in the persecution 
of ministers of the gospel, during the war and since, 
have subsequently been elevated to the most honorable 
and lucrative offices in the gift of the people. While 
the people have professed the strongest disapprobation 
of these persecutions, it can not be denied that for some 
reasons the perpetrators of the grossest outrages upon 
ministers of the gospel have filled and are now filling 
the highest civil offices. 




Elder James Duval — His Own Statement — Endorsement — Minister 
of the Regular Baptist Church— Arrested at M idnight — Suffered 
Much — Passes and Permits — Assessment for Military Purposes — 
Arrest of Elder' G. "W. Stout— Elder Duval again Arrested — Sent 
to Chillic.othe— Charge, Trial and Acquittal — Making History — 
Re-arrested at New Garden — Heavy Bond — In Court for not Tak- 
ing the Oath — Met others in the Same Condemnation — Isaac Odell 
and Allen Sisk under Indictment with Elder Duval — Estebb, the 
Prosecuting Attorney — Dunn & Garver for the Defense — Baptist 
Church at 'New Garden — Trial of their Pastor, Elder Isaac Odell, 
for not taking the Oath — Acquitted-Then Convicted — Division of 
the Church— Troubles — Non-Fellowship. 

Elder James Duval. 

The following sketch, furnished by this venerable 
servant of God, will be read with thrilling interest by 
the people of the State where he has been so long and 
so favorably known. It is unnecessary to present, for 
the people of Missouri, any endorsement of his charac- 
ter, but for the benefit of others, and because his state- 
ment, herewith submitted in his own style, involves the 
names and details the persecutions of others, it may not 
be out of place to insert here the following paper: 

"Eichmond, Kay Co., Mo., May 22, 1869. 

" Elder James Duval, of this county, is a minister of 
the gospel of the regular Baptist Church, and bears an 
unblemished character as a preacher and a Christian 

(Signed) "George W. Dunn, 

"Austin A. King, 
"A. W. Doniphan. " 


These gentlemen are all widely known, even beyond 
the State ; and their endorsement is sufficient to give 
force to every word of the following statement. The 
author does not feel at liberty to either divide or abridge 
the document, lest the peculiar force of the narrative, 
told in his own language and style, should be marred, 
and the characteristics of the persecution should be de- 
prived of their richness of detail. Besides, a variety of 
style is always pleasing to the reader. 

"Kichmond, Kay Co., Mo., May, 1869. 

"Kev. P. M. Pinckard: Dear Sir — You have asked 
through the Advocate for information concerning the 
( persecution of ministers of the gospel in Missouri/ and 
being myself one of the unfortunately proscribed ones 
by the { powers that be/ I thought it just and proper 
that I should contribute my mite of information, which 
I shall do partly from memory and partly from records. 

"I will just here state that I have now been in con- 
stant connection with the old regular Baptist Church 
more than forty-five years. I joined that people upon 
a profession of faith in Christ, and was baptized, April 
18th, 1824, into the fellowship of the Gourdvine church, 
Culpepper county, Va., by Elder James Garnet, who 
was then pastor of that church. From Hardy county, 
Ya., in the fall of 1848, I moved and settled in Eay 
county, near Eichmond, Mo., where I now reside, as all 
the old settlers know. Since then my acts and deeds, 
both private and public, as a citizen and a minister of 
Christ's word, are before the public. 

" I will here endeavor to give a brief detail of the 
troubles and perplexities I have had with the Federal 


"About the 15th of February, 1862, Captain Kelsaw, 
then commanding a company of men at Knoxville, Eay 
county, sent a squad of soldiers at twelve o'clock at 
night — as cold a night as well could be, heavy snow on 
the ground — and had me arrested and taken that night 
to Knoxville. These men also took from me a wagon 
and a pair of mules, and afterward two good horses ; 
still later the Federals took loads of corn and hay, for 
which I have received no compensation. I arrived in 
Knoxville some time before day, very much chilled, 
almost frozen, and had to lie the rest of the night on 
the counter of an old store-room which the soldiers oc- 
cupied. The next morning, with a guard at my heels, 
[ was allowed the privilege of calling on a friend (Mrs. 
Mary Stone), when I was kindly furnished with my 

" I was then put in charge of J. 1ST. Henry, who was 
acting in some military capacity, who safely, but in a 
rude and domineering manner, conducted me to Cam- 
eron, Col. Cathcrwood's headquarters. I was then held 
there as a prisoner, as you will presently see, for near 
two weeks. It is true that I had the privilege of board- 
ing at the hotel and paying my bill. 

"I inquired of Colonel Catherwood what were the 
charges against me. He never exhibited any. But he 
finally told me that I would have to give bond to keep 
the peace, or something to that effect. He then allowed 
me a certain number of days to return home and get 
security, which I did in the given time. 

"I then got my friend and neighbor, ChristcpheL- 
Trigg, who went with me to Cameron, and entered into 
bond with me in the sum of two thousand dollars to do 


certain tilings therein specified. Upon which I received 

the following : 

" ' Headquarters at Cameron, ) 
February 27th, 1862. j 

"'This is to certify that James Duval has this day 

subscribed to oath of allegiance to the United States, 

and filed a bond, as prescribed by the Commanding 

General. E. C. Catherwood, 

"'Col. Commanding M. S. M.' 

" ' Headquarters at Cameron, ") 

February 27th, 1862. j 

"'This is to certify that James Duval has been re- 
leased by giving bond and taking the oath of allegiance 
to the United States of America, and is entitled to citizen- 
ship and protection as such by all United States forces, 
so long as he regards the same. By order. 

"'M. L. James, Major Com'dg. 

" I afterward obtained the following passes : 

"'Eichmond, May 1st, 1862. 
" ' Mr. James Duval has permission to go to Caldwell 
county to fill an appointment of the gospel, and to La- 
fayette for the same purpose. Abraham Allen, 
"'Capt. and Provost-Marshal at Eichmond, Mo.' 

"'Office Provost-Marshal, \ 
Eichmond, Mo., September 30th, 1862. j 

"'Permission is hereby granted to James Duval to 
go to Clinton and Caldwell counties, Mo. He being 
exempt from military duty. Federal soldiers will re- 
spect this pass. W. Elliott,^ 

"'By E. G-. Lowe, Dept. Provost-Marshal/ 

" Some short time after this I was assessed by a com- 
mittee appointed for that purpose a tax of eighty-eight 


dollars. Upon what basis or principle this tax was 
levied I never learned. 1 failed to pay in time, and I 
had a notice served on me to pay within five days or 
property double the amount would be taken to satisfy 
this claim. This notice I failed to save, or can not just 
now put my hand on it. However, I paid thirty dollars, 
and have the following to show for it : 

"'Kay County, Mo., Dec. 22, 1862. 
" ' Eeceived thirty dollars and — cents of James Duval, 
for the use of the Eay county Enrolled Militia. Same 
being in part the amount assessed against him for that 
purpose by the committee appointed under Special Or- 
der No. 30, dated Oct, 27, A. D. 1862, Headquarters 

Eay county E. M. M. 

"<D. P. Whitmer, 

"<E. Eiggs, 

" ' A. K. Eeyburn, 

" ' Collecting Committee/ 

w Thus you see some of the unjust restrictions laid on 
the ministers of Christ. When Christ says, ' Go ye into 
all the world and preach the gospel to every creature/ 
the party in power say, first obtain leave of us. Judge 
ye whether it is right to obey man or God. 

"Do you not think that we have great need of faith- 
ful gospel ministers, who will cry aloud and spare not ; 
shew Israel his sins and Jacob his transgression ? Are 
not these living evidences in this day of boasted light 
and knowledge of man's blindness and corruption ? 

" I will here notice another evidence of blinded Chris- 
tianity that came under my personal observation. In 
September, 1862, when our Association met at Crooked 
river, Eay county, the introductory sermon was preached, 


by previous appointment; by Elder G. W. Stout, a man 
of most exemplary Christian character, and held as such 
by his brethren, and even the world itself honors him 
as such; and after the Association had transacted its 
business and finally adjourned, and Elder Stout was on 
his horse for home, at somebody's instance Capt. John 
Hawkins arrested Elder Stout for traveling and preach- 
ing without first obtaining a pass. 

"Elder Stout's friends interfered in his behalf and 
vouched for him that he would report himself to Col. J. 
H. Moss, in command at Liberty, which he did ; and I 
reported the case back to Captain Hawkins. Colonel 
Moss gave Elder Stout a permit to go to Nodaway Asso- 
ciation, and where his business called him. 

" Who of Elder Stout's former brethren and friends 
stood by and witnessed this thing but did not interfere? 
You who were present and in the confidence of Captain 
Hawkins answer: '"We ought to lay down our lives for 
our brethren/ but not arrest them and put them in jail. 

"In February, 1864, I was reported to Captain Tiifin, 
then holding the post at Richmond. There being no 
Provost-Marshal there then, I was sent to Chillicothe, 
and kept there a prisoner for near two weeks. 

" I was placed in the hands of Baker Wilson and two 
others as a guard to take me to Chillicothe. Baker 
Wilson treated me kindly and respectfully — very differ- 
ent from J. N". Henry. 

"He took me to Mr. Herrick, the Provost-Marshal, 
who placed me in the hands of John Gant, with direc- 
tions to go to the jail and get my breakfast, which I did, 
and then report at his office. I then made a plain state- 
ment of facts as they had occurred in this matter, and 


told him I could prove my assertions if he would allow 
me time to take a few depositions, which he kindly did. 
The Marshal then gave me the limits of the town for 
my boundary. 

"I was now kindly invited to the house of Charles H. 
Mansur, who, with his kind lady, did all in his power 
to make my situation as comfortable as possible under 
the circumstances, for which I feel under lasting obliga- 
tions. I formed some other acquaintances who seemed 
deeply to sympathize with me, but were actually afraid 
to let it be known. I occasionally, as directed, reported 
to the Marshal, who, when not engaged in busiuess, was 
free and frank to talk, and I think is a just man. He said 
he was there to punish the guilty, not innocent men. I 
asked him with what I was charged in this case. He at 
first refused to tell me. I then told him what Captain 
Tiffin had told me. He then showed me the affidavit of 
Mrs. Herod, stating that I had passed her house piloting 
bushwhackers, and that she heard me say some things 
to Mr. Jeremiah McDonald. I satisfied the Marshal 
that these men, who had taken me that day and com- 
pelled me to pilot them a few miles, were not bush- 
whackers, but some of Shelby's men, under Col. Lewis 
Bohanon, who the day before had taken Carrollton. 

tt The conversation said to have been had with Mr. 
McDonald was all satisfactorily settled by his deposition 
and a few letters from gentlemen at Eichmond. So, 
when the day of trial arrived, there were no other 
charges against me and I was acquitted. I felt humili- 
ated and mortified to think that I, as a minister of 
Christ's Word, should bring disgrace on the cause of my 

Master. But what could I do. All this was forced 


upon me, without my consent in any wise. It has 
caused me a great deal of sober reflection and deep 
searching of heart to know whether I was in fault. 

"But upon more mature reflection, considering the 
excitement of the times and the apparent hue and cry 
against every man that would not join in the fanaticisms 
of the day, Paul, the Apostle, in the 2 Timothy iii. 12, 
came to my relief: ' Yea, and all that will live godly in 
Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution/ 

" These statements I have made, and they are well 
known to be strictly true by many citizens now living 
in this community; and as we are now making history 
for the generations who shall live after us, let us pen 
them down for the benefit of those who may survive us, 
60 that all may clearly see that men are now, as in other 
days, wicked, and that nothing short of the love of God 
shed abroad in their hearts will make men either love 
or fear God aright. 

" I will now mention some of the troubles that I have with the State authorities. 

" The first trouble, as a minister of Jesus Christ, that 
I ever had with the State authorities occurred at New 
Garden church, Ray county, on the third day of Novem- 
ber, 1865. I will detail, as near as I can, exactly what 
happened on this occasion. 

"Elder Joseph Warder had an*- appointment to preach 
at New Garden on Thursday, the third day of Novem- 
ber, 1865, and I promised to meet him there on our way 
to Little Shoal, Clay county. Elder "Warder failed to 
come, so I had to occupy the pulpit, and tried to preach 
to the people then assembled from the Acts of the 
Apostles, v. 38 : * Refrain from these men and let them 


alone : for if this counsel, or this work be of men, it will 
come to nought; but if it be of God, ye can not over- 
throw it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against 

"Nothing unusual took place during the services. 
After the congregation was dismissed, I came out of the 
house and went where my horse was hitched. There 1 
was pursued by Charles Perkins, with pistols buckled 
on him, and he told me that he was authorized to arrest 
me. I asked him for what ? He then presented me a 
paper, which I read, which stated in substance, if not 
verbatim, that, upon information furnished by Andrew 
Cleavinger, Joseph Warder and James Duval had, on 
this 3d day of November, 1865, preached at New Garden 
meeting house without first having taken the oath of 

"Upon this charge Charles Perkins was commanded 
to forthwith arrest the said Joseph Warder and James 
Duval, and bring them before Hiram Enlow, a Justice 
of the Peace, to answer the aforesaid charges. And this 
you shall in no wise omit, &c, &c. Signed, Hiram En- 
low, J. P. 

" Elder Warder was not present, notwithstanding the 
aforesaid affidavit. I was taken in custody by the said 
Charles Perkins, who was deputized for the purpose, 
Allan Sisk, the legal constable of the township, refusing 
to serve this process. 

" So I was held in custody by Charles Perkins, and 
that evening taken before his honor, Hiram Enlow, J. P., 
and there bound in a bond of one thousand dollars to 
again appear before said Enlow on the 17th inst. John 
Welton was my security for my appearance. I was 


then released for the present, and went on to Little 
Shoal, Clay county, to attend my regular appointments. 

" While in the 'Squire's custody, I asked him if he 
believed in the Christian religion ? He said he did, and 
that he liked to hear the gospel preached. I then asked 
him if he went to New Garden to-day to hear the gospel 
preached ? He made no reply. 

" On the 17th of November I again appeared before 
his honor, Hiram Enlow, J. P. Several neighbors and 
friends were now present. 

"B. J. Waters, the present Eadical representative 
from Eay county, was present, acting as prosecuting at- 
torney. When called up for trial, I asked leave to 
examine the papers, and found they were not the same 
papers on which I was arrested, and told them so. Elder 
Warder's name was not on these papers at all. The 
'Squire told me that I must answer to the charges on the 
papers before me. I told the 'Squire that this was all a 
new business to me, and I did not know exactly how to 
proceed. I asked him what provisions the law made 
for me under these circumstances ? He told me I could 
swear that I could not get justice in his court ; and that 
I could appeal to the Circuit Court. I told him that 
was the thing exactly. I appealed to the Circuit Court. 
B. J. Waters then asked him for what amount he should 
take the bond. I replied to him, ' Sir, remember you 
are not bonding a felon.' The 'Squire said, fill the 
bond for two thousand dollars. John Cleavinger and 
John Welton entered as bondsmen for my appearance 
at the next Circuit Court, the first Monday in March 
following, where I again appeared. 

"At Court I met Elder Isaac Odell and Allan Sisk, 


regular Baptist ministers; Rev. Samuel Alexander, D. 
M. Proctor and Dr. Moses F. Rainwater, Methodist 
ministers, and Rev. Hardy Holman, Kellyite Methodist 
— all charged with violating the law, because we could 
not, and would not, allow them to be conscience keepers 
for us, in taking an oath that made us bow to their god. 
By so doing we would acknowledge that men have 
rights over their fellow-men to make them worship 
God after a prescribed form of law. We read that 'God 
is a Spirit; and they that worship him must worship 
him in spirit and in truth/ — John iv, 24. 

" After the convention oath came in force, prohibit- 
ing ministers from solemnizing marriages, I acknowl- 
edged their right to prohibit in this case ; so I did not, 
while the law was in force, attempt to marry any one. 
But preaching the gospel to sinners was another thing. 
Christ said, ( My kingdom is not of this world;' there- 
fore men are not authorized to make laws to govern his 
kingdom. Christ has given us all necessary laws to 
govern his kingdom. Let all his followers obey them. 

"At the March term of the Court we had no trial, but 
were all severally bound again to appear at the next 
term of the Court ; Jacob Seek vouching for me in this 
case in the sum of four hundred dollars. Judge Walter 
King presiding. 

"At that March Court two indictments were found 
against me for preaching the gospel without first taking 
the oath of loyalty. Simon E. Odell was summoned 
before the following grand jury and gave information, 
viz. : George "W. Sargeant, foreman, George W. Foster, 
John Bogart, H. E. Owens, James T. Lamar, David 
Conner, Charles B. Bacon ; Holland Yanderpool, Jere- 


miah Campbell, Wm. Yanbebber, James Hughes, Joseph 
Gossage, Daniel Cramer, Edwin Odell, Sam'l Clevinger, 
John Query, Daniel Parker and Isaiah Mansur. 

" I will now relate another case that came under my 

" About the first of February, 1866, Aaron Cleavinger 
gave information to Elisha Riggs, Esq., that Elder Isaac 
Odell had preached without first having taken the oath 
«of loyalty. About the same time Aaron Cleavinger 
gave information to Elisha Riggs, Esq., that Allan Sisk 
had also violated the law by 'performing the functions' 
of a minister in like manner. Wherefore, the said 
Elisha Riggs, Justice of the Peace, did authorize and 
require one Charles Perkins to arrest the said Isaac 
Odell and Allan Sisk, and bring them before him, the 
said Elisha Riggs, J. P., which he did about the 11th or 
12th of February ) and because they refused to give bail 
in the case, did actually send them to Richmond and put 
them in the county jail. 

"Friends interfered, and Judge Walter King granted 
a habeas corpus, and had them brought before him in 
Judge Bannister's office. Allan Sisk was now bound in 
the sum of two thousand dollars to appear at the next 
Circuit Court ; Lawson Sisk, John Seek and Simon E. 
Odell, securities. Elder Isaac Odell was bound in the 
sum of two thousand dollars to appear at the next Cir- 
cuit Cour'_ ; Lawson Sisk, John Seek and S. E. Odell, 

"These bonds and fetters, and this species of tyranny 
and persecution, did not yet satisfy the enemies of the 
cross of Christ j their malicious hatred and fiendish pro- 
pensities were not yet satisfied; they must show the 


spirit of their master yet a little farther — 'Ye are of 
your father the devil, and the lust of your father ye will 
do. — John viii, 44. So about the last of May or the first 
of June, 1866, Nathan W. Perkins informed Elisha 
Riggs, J. P., that James Duval had again, at some place, 
or at some time (for the information did not state when 
nor where the misdemeanor was done), violate the law 
by preaching without first having taken the oath of 
loyal ty. 

"Near about the same time, Alfred Nelson informed 
Elisha Riggs, J. P., that Elder Isaac Odell had violated 
the law by preaching without first having taken the 
oath of loyalty. But he, too, like Nathan "W. Perkins, 
failed to set forth the time or place. 

"The warrants to arrest and bring before him or some 
other justice of the peace the said Duval and Odell were 
placed in Constable Sisk's hands to execute, so he depu- 
tized Joshua Smart to execute them. Deputy Smart 
arrested Elder Odell, and came to my house June 12th 
and arrested me in like manner, and took us to Rich- 
mond, before D. H. Quesenberry, J. P. Here we were, 
like criminals, arraigned in open court to answer the 
charge — for preaching. 

Mr. E. F. Estebb, Prosecuting Attorney, appeared 
against us. Our mutual friends, Hon. G. W. Dunn and 
C. F. Garner, Esq., appeared in our behalf before the 
court without charge. We had quite a contest over the 
case. Several speeches for and against were made, but 
as the charges were not very criminal and the informa- 
tion very indefinite upon the allegation — a poor thing 
at best — the prosecuting attorney failed to convict us, 
and the unfortunate informers had the costs to pay. 


"After the decision of the l Cummings case we were 
all discharged from custody, and are still engaged in 
trying to preach Christ — the "Way, the Truth, the Life — 
to sinners. ' But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them 
that are lost.' 

"Only think of the age of the world in which we 
live, with all the teaching and preaching, and laws to 
restrain men from doing violence and wrong to their 
fellow men. Yet if men are so wicked and demoralized, 
and are living in our midst, is it not right and just to 
hold them to strict responsibility for what they have 
done? 'Let us not be weary in well doing, for in due 
season we shall reap if we faint not/ 

" Before I close I will mention one other case that 
took place under these stringent laws of the State that 
required ministers of the gospel to take a prescribed 
conventional oath, or they could not perform their min- 
isterial functions without laying themselves liable to 

" In the county of Kay there is a regular Baptist 
Church called New Garden. This Church had erected 
a comfortable building for a place of worship. There 
were, and had been for some time, political differences of 
opinion among the brethren, and finally, in the summer 
of 1866, the Radical or law-abiding party, as they st} T led 
themselves, arraigned their pastor, Elder Isaac Odell, a 
man of exemplary Christian character, as they themselves 
then admitted, before the Church for l violating the new 
Constitution.' Elder Odell denied the charge. This 
was at their June meeting for business. The case was 
now brought before the Church, Judge Joseph Thorp, 
Moderator. The case was argued before the Church for 


some time, both for and against the charge, and finally 
the Moderator put the question to the Church, and the 
Church sustained their pastor. 

"The Church considered the question now settled and 
were remiss in prompt attention at the next monthly 
meeting; so those who brought the charge took advan- 
tage of the absentees and again raised the question, and, 
having the majority then present, moved to rescind what 
was done at the last Church meeting. 

"The Church assumed the right and jurisdiction of a 
court, and sat in the capacity of a jury, and found, in 
their way of deciding things, Elder Odell guilty of the 
charge, and excluded him from their pulpit. 

"The opposite party, or those who remained with 
the Association, tried to convince the complainers that 
this was a political offense, and that they should have 
nothing to do with it until the courts of the State, which 
alone had jurisdiction of the case, had convicted Elder 
Odell of a misdemeanor, and then it would be time 
enough for them to take cognizance of the case. 

"These complainers admitted to the Church while the 
case was pending that they had no charges whatever 
against Elder Odell; that his practice was good as a 
Christian, his faith correct, he observed their Church 
rules properly, but he must obey the laws of his State. 

"Elder Odell, with others, as I have already stated, 
was at that time, upon information furnished, under an 
indictment by the grand jury for preaching without first 
taking the oath prescribed. But these Eadical friends 
would not wait until a conviction was had in open court, 
but must now execute judgment, which they did, with 
the following consequences : 


"The Church now divided upon the propriety and le- 
gality of such procedure, and each party appealed to the 
Association by sending letters and messengers. The 
party that remained with the Association sent up the fol- 
lowing question: 'Is it wise or scriptural to arraign a 
brother and exercise Church discipline when the offense 
is purely political V To which the Association answered 
negatively — -'neither wise nor scriptural.' So the Radi- 
cal party was now dropped from the fellowship of the 
Church and the Association. The former clerk went 
with the Radicals and kept, by force, the Church records. 

" The Radicals locked the church doors and still keep 
it, and unkindly refuse to allow their former brethren 
a day in the house, although the latter had paid most in 
building the house. Each party remains separate and 
has no Christian fellowship or intercourse whatever, 
religiously, with each other. 

" The indictment against Elder Odell in court failed, 
consequently the charge was false ; and now who is to 
acknowledge the wrong done in the case ? 

"I have here stated that this division was political, 
and not religious, for there was no question concerning 
the faith ever involved in the controversy. As proof 
in the case, every Radical member that cried, ' obey the 
law/ left the Church proiDer and went with the disaf- 
fected ones. Every Conservative member remained 
with the Church. It is, therefore, apparent to all that 
this division was on a political question — a thing here- 
tofore not known in our Churches. 

" The Regular Baptists have never introduced in their 
Churches any political tests as terms of membership or 
Christian communion. Not so with some who have 


separated from us ; 'they went out from us because they 
were not of us ; for if they had been of us they would, no 
doubt, have continued with us ; but they went out that 
they might be made manifest that they were not all of 
us/ 1 John ii. 19. 

" We allow our brethren to hold whatever political 
opinions they may think are right and just, provided 
they do not introduce them into the Church, to the an- 
noyance and disturbance of the peace and fellowship of 
the brethren. We have always, as a religious body of 
people, carefully avoided the mixing of Church and 
State together in our religious devotions. 

" Christ saj's, * My kingdom is not of this world/ We 
consider that Christ has given us in his Word a sufficient 
code of laws to govern us here in this world: 'If ye 
love me keep my commandments. ' And whensoever 
we disregard the written Word of God and attempt to 
supply supposed deficiencies by the legislation of men, 
we greatly err to our own heart. This is a reflection 
upon the wisdom of God and denies the doctrine of in- 
spiration ; from which may God deliver his people. 

"I have written these sketches mostly from memory, 
but I know in the main they are true, and submit them 
to your discretion and farther disposal, hoping that 
whatever may be done may tend to the glory of God 
and the instruction of his people in establishing them in 
the truth. 

" Kespectfully, I hope, your brother in gospel bonds 
for the truth's sake, James Duval.' ' 




Exceptional Distinction — Revs. J. B. H. Wooldrige, D. J. Marquis 
and Geo. W. Jchnson Arrested, Abused and Imprisoned for Asso- 
ciating Together — Rev. M. M. Pugh Arrested and Imprisoned — 
Arrested Three Times— Indicted — Northern Methodists Implicated 
in his Persecutions — Flags over Pulpits by Military Orders — Efforts 
to Force the Consciences of Ministers — A Caustic Note — "Der 
Union Vlag on Der Secesh Church" — A Minister's "Wife Ordered 
to Make a Shroud for a Dead Union Soldier — Keen Retort — An 
Old Minister in a Rebel Camp — How he "Went Dead" and 
"Saved his Bacon" and Potatoes — Rev. J. M. Breedi?ig — Armed 
Men Visit him at Midnight — Order him to Leave the Country in 
Six Da} T s because he was a Southern Methodist Preacher — Arrested 
at Church by Lieutenant Combs— A Parley — Men said if They 
were not Permitted to Shoot They would Egg Him — Waylaid by 
Soldiers to Assassinate Him — Providential Escape — Waylaid the 
Second Time, and Providential Escape — Move to Macon County — 
Further Troubles — Reflections. 

If to suffer for righteousness' sake entitles men to exclu- 
sive privileges in the kingdom of heaven, the ministers 
of Missouri will have pre-eminence among those who 
suffer for the word of G-od and the testimony of Jesus. 
Exceptional honors among the sanctified will distinguish 
many of the humblest ministers of this State. And if 
the instigators of persecution are to be put in the 
category of the excluded, some of the most notorious 
ministers of the State will, in the final award, be reject- 
ed, disowned and dishonored. 

Rev. Geo. W. Johnson, Rev. D. J. Marquis and Rev. 


Among the first to feel the crushing power of the 
persecutor were Revs. D. J. Marquis and J. B. H. 


"Wooldridge, of tho St. Louis Conference, M. E. Church, 
South, and Eev. George W. Johnson, of the Baptist 

The first two have for many years been zealous, ear- 
nest and successful itinerant ministers, and Mr. Johnson 
is a Baptist minister of high standing and unblemished 
character, and Principal of the Tipton High School. 

In 1861, soon after the occupation of Jefferson City 
by the Federal forces, these three men were arrested 
by Col. Boernstein's order, or by his officers, at Tipton, 
in Moniteau county, taken to Jefferson City, abused by 
the officers, kept in the dungeon under the State Capitol 
over twenty-four hours without a mouthful of food, 
taken out, abused, put on board a steamer and sent up 
to Boonville. They fell into the hands of Col. Steven- 
son, who had them closely guarded in the fair grounds 
for two days, and then sent to St. Louis. Here they 
were kept for two days in the guard-house, in the old 
arsenal, and then released unconditionally, by order of 
Major- General Fremont. 

The only charge against Marquis was that he was a 
minister of the Southern Methodist Church, and kept 
company with Wooldridge. They charged Wooldridge 
with keeping company with Southern Methodist Minis- 
ters who were known to be disloyal ; and Johnson had 
associated with Marquis and Wooldridge, and had even 
aided them in a protracted meeting. 

The old adage, that "evil communications corrupt 
good manners/' is scarcely a criminal law, and the as- 
sociations of ministers of the gospel in their legitimate 
.work can hardly be considered a criminal offense involv- 
ing the safety of the Federal Government. And yet 


these humble ministers were subjected to arrest, insult, 
imprisonment, hunger, abuse and various tortures of 
mind and body, for no other reason than their ecclesias- 
tical connection and ministerial association. 

While Mr. Marquis was attending the Warrensburg- 
Arrow Rock-Waverly Conference, in the fall of 1861, 
his home was taken and used for a hospital, and literally 
stripped of everything of any value — even the clothing 
of himself and family — leaving not a single change of 
raiment for any of them. A suit of thin summer cloth 
which Mr. Marquis had on at the time was everything 
he had to wear, and with which to start again in life. 
This act of plunder and robbery was done by General 
Fremont's men, upon the charge that Marquis was a 
Southern Methodist minister and had no rights. 

Believing that his life was not safe in Moniteau, he 
removed to Jefferson county, where he was still subject 
to persecution during the war, and where he had the 
honor of an indictment from the grand jury, after the 
war closed, for preaching the gospel without taking the 
oath prescribed by the new Constitution of the State. 

Rev. M. M. Pugh. 

The St. Louis Conference of the M. E. Church, South, 
has few better men than the Rev. M. M. Pugh, at this 
time (1869) Presiding Elder of the Boonville district. 

He is a faithful, zealous, able minister of the gospel, 
and well reported of in all the Churches for his amiable 
spirit, ardent zeal, self-denying consecration to his work, 
and successful labors in the pulpit. 

In 1861 the Conference appointed him to Kansas City 
station. The war had then been raging fiercely along 


the Missouri-Kansas border for several months, and the 
ministers of the M. E. Church, South, had come in for a 
large share of persecution, and a number of them had 
already fled for safety. Mr. Eugh was placed by this 
appointment in the lines of some of the meanest men 
who wore the Federal uniform during the war. He had 
but a few years before left the Northern Methodist 
Church for the Southern, and he appreciated fully the 
delicacy of the situation and the danger of the surround- 
ings. He was prudent, cautious and circumspect in the 
pulpit and out of it; gave utterance to no sentiment 
that would afford even a pretext for his arrest and pun- 
ishment. He could not approve of the outrages com- 
mitted in the name of the Union on the innocent and 
defenseless, but kept his disapprobation to himself. His 
extreme caution, however, did not long exempt him 
from annoyance and trouble. He modestly writes : 

"I was first arrested in Kansas City, in the latter 
part of 1861, at the instance of a Northern Methodist, 
and confined in Fort Union for a short time, perhaps 
not more than one hour, then released on parole and 
granted city limits. 

"In the summer of 1862 I was greatly anno} T ed and 
frequently threatened by a Northern Methodist preacher 
who had command of a company in Kansas City at 
that time. 

"To avoid the relentless opposition and persecution 
of this man, I left home two or three weeks. He said 
his Church was largely represented in the Federal 
army, and to a considerable extent influenced the U. S. 
forces, and that Southern Methodist preachers should 
be hunted and punished. I mention this to show that 


we were not persecuted for evil-doing, but simply be- 
cause we were Southern Methodists. This, in their 
eyes, was a crime of the greatest magnitude. 

"In the fall of 1862 I was ordered to pray for the 
President of the United States by name, for the U. S. 
Congress, and for the success of the Union army, ' so- 
called.' This I refused to do ; and said, among other 
things, that no man, or class of men, should dictate my 

"In the winter of 1863 I was assessed as a Southern 
sympathizer. I refused to pay the unjust assessment. For 
this refusal I was arrested and put in the guard-house 
in Kansas City. Here I was kept in close confinement 
about twenty-four hours, when, in company with nine 
others imprisoned for the same offense, I was sent to 
Independence in a greasy wagon guarded by twenty 
men and lodged in an exceedingly filthy prison. Col. 
W. R. Penick, then in command, refused to let us have 
our meals from the hotel or from our friends. We were 
kept in this filthy place about twenty-four hours, when 
we were unconditionally released by order of Governor 

"Believing that I could do no good, opposed as we 
were, and that cruel men were seeking my life, I left 
Kansas City in April, 1863. Soon after I left the North- 
ern Methodists took possession of our church. 

" In March, 1866, I was indicted in Independence for 
preaching without taking the oath of the new Constitu- 

" I was arrested by the Deputy Sheriff, a man who 
before the war would not have been thought of in con- 
nection with that office. I gave bond for my appear- 


ance at the next term of the court. "W. L. Bone and J. 
B. Henry, Esqs., went on my bond. Judge Tutt was on 
the bench, and Mr. Johnson, State's Attorney. 

"In the fall I appeared in court, when the case was 
continued. The next spring, the U. S. Supreme Court 
having decided the so-called l test oath ' unconstitutional 
my case was dismissed. 

"I was an ordained Elder in the Church, and had 
been preaching ten years when I went to Kansas City." 

Before Mr. Pugh left Kansas City he was not only 
informed that his life was in danger, but the Northern 
Methodist preacher, of whom he speaks, informed him 
and others that such was the feeling of his men toward 
Mr. Pugh that he feared assassination every night — that 
Mr. Pugh could not walk the streets any time, day or 
night, in safety. 

It was no uncommon thing for military commanders 
to send special orders to ministers of the Southern 
Methodist Church, ordering prayers for specific persons 
or things, and requiring flags to be displayed from the 
pulpit or church door. 

It will answer the purposes of history merely to sam- 
ple these orders. Petty tyranny no where surpasses it : 

"[Special Orders, No. 10.] 

"Headquarters, Westport, Mo., | 
"January 31, 1863. j 

"I. It being proper that in all our supplications for 
the blessings of Deity the condition of our beloved 
but distracted country should not be overlooked ; there- 
fore, it is ordered — to the end that should any prove 
forgetful they may be reminded that they have a gov- 
ernment to pray for — that during the quarterly meeting 


of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, now in ses- 
sion in this city, the Stars and Stripes be conspicuously 
displayed in front of the pulpit of the church where 
said meeting is held. 

" II. The pastor of said church will cause this order 
to be published from the pulpit of his church. 

"By order of W. C. Eansom, Major, commanding U. 
S. forces at Westport, Mo." 

Eev. John A. Murphy was pastor, and Messrs. H. 
Houck and A. P. "VVarfield " executed the order to save 
the property." 

The following note explains the following order . The 
order gave rise to many reflections, doubtless, that are 
not in the note. The note is given verbatim : 

"Bro. P. — On the opposite page you will observe an 
item of history which may be worthy a place in your 
forthcoming book. The occasion of this order was the 
anniversary of the ' Camp Jackson Victory/ which was 
celebrated hugely by the St. Charles 'Loilists/ especially 
by the Teutonic portion of them. 

" Ours was the only Church in the city honored (?) by 
Colonel Emmons with an official order to display the 
National colors. The order was obeyed, of course; and 
on the return of our ' Super Stupid Union Savers ' from 
their day of bacchanalian revelry in the suburbs of the 
city, our church was again honored (?) by a halt in front 
of it, and 'three cheers for deryunion flag on der Secesh 

"Col. Emmons and his 'Home Guards ' ought to be 
immortalized. Could you not help it on ? They will 
certainly live while St. Charles Methodism can remember. 
« Truly, . " 


The order is as follows : 

" He adquarters, St. Charles, Mo., ") 
"May 9, 1863. } 

"Messrs. Dennis McDonald, Benjamin R. Shores, Dr. 

Evans and John S. McDowell, Trustees M. E. Church, 

South, at St. Charles, Mo., will cause the National Elag 

to be raised over their church in this city without delay. 

"Ben. Emmons, Jr., 

a Colonel and Provost-Marshal." 

At Kansas City, St. Joseph, Jefferson City and many 
other places similar orders were issued, and in some in- 
stances orders were sent up to the pulpit commanding 
special and public prayers to be offered for specific per- 
sons and things, either to test the loyalty of ministers, 
or, more truthfully, to trifle with the consciences of men 
in the solemn matters of divine worship. 

In some instances military commanders would order 
the strongest Southern sympathizers to make Union 
flags, or shrouds for dead Union soldiers. Not a few 
amusing incidents occurred from this cause, only one of 
which must suffice now, as it occurred with a minister's 
wife, and is a fine specimen of ready retort and genuine 
wit upon a solemn subject. 

In the winter of 1862 Major Oliver, in command of 
about four companies of U. S. troops, entered Indepen- 
dence, Mo., and established his winter quarters in the 
Female College buildings. When his command had 
approached within two miles of the city they were fired 
on from the brush by QuantrelPs " bushwhackers." One 
man was killed and several severely wounded. 

Major Oliver was much exasperated, and made many 
threats that were never carried into execution. Amongst 


other things he made inquiry for the strongest female 
secessionist; or as he termed it, " she-rebel/' in the city, 
vowing that he would order her to make a shroud for 
the dead soldier. Several ladies were mentioned whose 
sympathies with the South were very strong, and, 
amongst the number, Mrs. Wallace, the wife of the Rev. 
T. Wallace, a Southern Methodist preacher. The fact 
that she was a minister's wife gave her Southern pro- 
clivities pre-eminence in his mind, and he sent his 
orderly with the goods and about the following message : 
"Madam, Major Oliver, commanding this post, has 
learned that you are the strongest secesh woman in this 
city, and has sent me with these goods and an order 
that you make forthwith a shroud for a Union soldier 
killed by the bushwhackers this morning. He hopes 
that you will in this way compensate, in part, for the 
work of your bushwhacker friends." 

This last sentence was uttered in a tone and with an 
emphasis that did not permit her to doubt its import. 
She instantly and politely replied: 

"Present my respects to Major Oliver, and tell him 
the shroud will be ready in two hours ; and say to him 
that it would afford me the greatest pleasure to make 
shrouds for his whole command." 

It is needless to say that Mrs. Wallace was not 
troubled with any more shroud making for Maj. Oliver's 

During this same winter, and while Major Oliver was 
in command at Independence, in the many skirmishes 
and fights between the Federal soldiers and "Quantrell's 
bushwhackers," as they were called, many rich incidents 


occurred, amongst them the following, in which one of 
the oldest ministers in the State was the hero : 

Rev. S. S. Colburn, for many long years a traveling 
preacher in the itinerant ranks of the M. E. Church, 
South, and then living in Cass county, in a superannuated 
condition, had been so much annoyed, so often robbed, 
and his life so repeatedly threatened, that he concluded 
to leave his home and place himself under the protec- 
tion of friendly bayonets as his only means of safety. 
He happened one day upon the camp of Quantrell and 
his men, some of whom he knew very well as his 
"neighbor boys." They prevailed on him to remain 
with them a few days and they would protect him. He 
was too old to bear arms and do the kind of fighting 
they had to do, but he could keep camp for them and 
stay with his old friends sometimes at night. They 
offered the best they had, with their most vigilant 
protection, which the old man concluded to accept for a 
few days. 

He had not been long with them when their supplies 
were about to give out, and a consultation was had as 
to the best method of replenishing the stock. It was 
soon agreed that Mr. Colburn should go to the house of 
an old friend not far off, stay all night, and bring in a 
sack of potatoes the next morning. "With this intent he 
left the camp late in the evening, and soon found him- 
self in the comfortable home of his friend, and in the 
most agreeable family intercourse around a cheerful fire. 
Old times were talked over and present events canvassed 
till a late hour, when the "family Bible/' the worship, 
the good night and the downy bed closed the scene. A 
refreshing sleep brought the old man to an early start, 


and the friendship of other years filled his sack with 
fine potatoes ) and, as the sun arose upon the world, he 
hailed the smoke of the early camp fire, and pressed on 
toward his hungry protectors. 

Just at daylight the camp had been surprised and 
attacked by a squad of Federal soldiers. The rebels fled 
in confusion, leaving the camp in possession of the 
enemy, while they formed in the adjacent brush and 
prepared to re-take the camp. Just as Mr. Colburn 
rode into camp, all ignorant of what had occurred, 
Quantrell opened fire on the enemy, which was prompt- 
ly returned. The preacher comprehended the situation 
in an instant, and, wheeling his horse, started to retreat. 
He was followed by a volley of whistling minnie balls 
from the new occupants of the camp, and fell from his 
horse instantly, by his sack of potatoes, and "went 
dead." The rebels re-took their camp, and in the pre- 
cipitate retreat of the enemy they rode over the sack 
of potatoes and the body of the preacher, the horses 
every time clearing both at a bound. When the preacher 
was assured of safety, he got up, shouldered his pota- 
toes and walked into camp with a broad smile on his 
face, to the great joy of his friends. By a timely ruse 
he saved both his bacon and potatoes. 

Eev. J. M. Breeding. 

The following account of the persecution of this ex- 
cellent and faithful local preacher of the M. E. Church, 
South, is quite an abridgement of the statement fur- 
aished, but is amply sufficient to show that very few 
men in these perilous times suffered more, and escaped 
more frequently, as " with the skin of his teeth." How 


wonderful that special Providence which so often inter- 
poses to save the lives of his chosen servants! 

In March, 1863, Mr. Breeding was residing on Barker's 
creek, in Henry county, Mo. His wife was very ill — 
not able to raise her head from her pillow. When they 
were alone, and at midnight, three armed men opened 
the yard gate, rode rapidly up to the house, and called 
for Mr. B. to come out. This he declined to do, telling 
them that he could hear what they had to say where he 
was. He saw from the door, which he held ajar, that 
they held their pistols well in hand, as if awaiting an 
object to shoot. They ordered him to come out a sec- 
ond time, and in no genteel language. He refused, 
saying to them that if they would come to see him in 
the day time he would see and talk with them like 

They asked him if he was armed. He told them that 
he was a civil man, and had some plows with which he 
expected to cultivate the ground in the summer; and did 
not let them know that he was wholly unarmed. They 
asked his politics, and were informed that he never 
meddled with the politics of the country; that his only 
platform was " Repentance toward God, and faith in 
the Lord Jesus Christ." 

" You are a preacher, then V 

"Yes, I try to preach sometimes." 

"A Southern Methodist preacher?" 

"Yes, I belong to the Methodist Ejuscopal Church, 

a Well, that is just what we have understood, and we 
don't intend to let any such man live in this country. 
We have come with authority to order you to leave in 


six days, and if you are here at the expiration of that 
time it will not be well with you. We want to know 
whether you intend to leave or not." 

Mr. B. asked for their authority, which they declined 
to give ; whereupon he told them as he had not meddled 
in any way with their political strife he did not think 
any sane officer would send them at such a time on such 
business. They remarked that he could either obey or 
risk the consequences, and turned and rode off. 

The excitement and alarm of this midnight interview 
proved well nigh fatal to his wife. As soon as they 
were gone, and he could renew his attentions to his wife, 
he thought that she was already passing down into the 
shadow of death. The anxiety and agony of the re- 
maining part of that dreadful night no tongue can' tell, 
no pen describe. About daylight she began to revive, 
and then to rest. On his knees, at her bedside, he de- 
termined that he would not leave her, though they 
should kill him. 

A few days after this occurrence, Mr. B. learned from 
the nearest military post, through a friend, that no such 
order had been issued ; but that the commander of the 
post, Captain Gallihar, would not be responsible for 
what his men did from under his eye. 

During the following summer there were very few 
nights when one or more of these lawless men was not 
seen prowling about the premises and keeping the 
preacher in constant dread of arson or assassination. 
He had no peace and felt no security. 

They, doubtless, meditated midnight mischief, but had 
not the courage to attempt it. They changed their 
plans, and began to report to the military officers vari- 


ous things on Mr. Breeding, to influence them to inter- 
fere for them and have him put out of the way. 

In July his appointment in Calhoun was attended one 
Sabbath by a Lieut. Combs, with his company of men, 
whom he stationed at convenient places about the church 
and along the road near the church, as though they ex- 
pected to encounter a desperate enemy. 

As he approached the church and began to compre- 
hend the situation, he discovered what he afterward 
learned were signals. When these signals were made 
the whole force moved out to the road and advanced 
rapidly toward the preacher; he was halted and his 
name demanded. 

" You pray for ' Bushwhackers/ I learn," said the 

" No more than for other sinners," the jyreacher an- 

" But," said the officer, " some of the boys tell me 
they have heard 3^011 pray for the success of Bush- 
whackers. They say they have known you long, and 
that you are an original secessionist; that you have 
always believed in secession," &c. 

The preacher appealed to those who had known him 
the longest, if they ever heard him utter disloyal senti- 
ments or knew him to attend a political meeting of any 
kind. He was no political partisan, and never had been* 
They finally told him that he was a Southern Methodist 
preacher and that was enough, as they were all rebels. 

While this conversation was going on and the most 
of the company were in disorder, a squad of men were 
drawn up in line in front of the preacher with their 
guns ready for use. Lieut. Combs stepped up in front 


of these men, when the conversation closed with the 
preacher, and talked to them for some time in a subdued 
tone of voice. At the close of the interview one of the 
men said, in a low voice : " Well, if you will not let us 
shoot him, we will egg him," and started off to a barn 
near by from which he soon returned with his hands 
full of eggs. The officer would not let him use the eggs, 
and after some further conversation he dismissed the 
preacher and took his company back to headquarters. 

A few days after this Mr. Breeding had occasion to 
go to Windsor for medicine for his afflicted wife. There 
he again met these Calhoun soldiers. They were very 
annoying and insulting. A mounted squad of them 
started off before Mr. B. was ready and took the road 
leading to his house. When the preacher started home 
and had reached the forks of the road, he was minded 
to take the plainest and best road, but his horse pulled 
so obstinately for the other that he finally yielded and 
reached his home in safety. The next day a friend 
came to see if he was safe, and informed him that the 
squad of soldiers that left Windsor before him, waylaid 
the road to assassinate him. What a providential de- 
liverance ! 

The next Sabbath Mr. Breeding had a regular appoint- 
ment to preach at Windsor. With the Sabbath morning 
came a foraging party to his house demanding breakfast. 
They stayed and detained the preacher until it was too 
late to reach his appointment, and he had to remain at 
home. This detention saved him further trouble, and 
probably his life. He afterward learned that a band 
of twenty men were all that morning on the road that 
he was expected to pass. When it became so late that 


they supposed he had gone by some other way, they 
went to the church, surrounded it and entered, but to 
discover again their disappointment. The preacher was 
nowhere to bo found ; and in consultation some wanted 
to go immediately to his house and inflict summary pun- 
ishment, but other counsels prevailed, and they deter- 
mined to try him again the next Sabbath at his appoint- 
ment at Moffat's School house. 

The Sabbath came, and with its earliest rays came a 
messenger from a Mr. Owen, a Baptist friend, request- 
ing Mr. Breeding to come to his house immediately as 
his son was at the point of death. Mr. B. went without 
delay several miles in a direction from the church. After 
detaining him as long as he could, Mr. Owen informed 
him of a trap set for him that day, and that he must re- 
main at his house all day. The preacher was not aware 
of any evil designs, and only yielded to much earnest 
solicitation to keep out of harm's way. 

After having so often and so narrowly escaped, Mr. 
Breeding thought it best to seek greater safety else- 
where. Accordingly he disposed of his effects, packed 
up and journeyed to Macon county, in North Missouri, 
and settled clown near the old Hebron Church. This 
move was attended with much privation, suffering, dan- 
ger and pecuniary loss. He found at his new home a 
faithful little band of men and women who met every 
Sabbath where prayer was wont to be made. To these 
he gladly joined himself. 

By this time religious privileges were few and religious 
liberty greatly abridged by the operation of the " new 
Constitution." Ministers were afraid to preach, and the 
membership discouraged and depressed. The party in 


power were very vigilant in hunting out and dragging 
before the civil courts all non-juring ministers. 

Mr. Breeding could not take the oath, and he con- 
tented himself for some time with an occasional exhorta- 
tion to the faithful few who still kept the altar fires 
burning in a quiet way. 

The meetings for prayer began to attract the attention 
of those in authority. They concluded that Mr. B. 
must be preaching, as the meetings were so regular and 
so well attended. The super-loyalists determined if such 
was the case they would take the law into their own 
hands and see what virtue there was in powder and ball. 

The next Sabbath found eight armed men on the front 
seat to enforce the authority of the new Constitution. 
There appeared an equal number of orderly citizens 
prepared to protect the peaceful worship of the congre- 
gation. For a time matters wore quite a menacing 

The usual prayer meeting exercises were had, and 
Mr. Breeding closed up with a warm and an earnest ex- 
hortation. The services were somewhat abbreviated, 
that the unfriendly parties might the sooner be separated. 

The next Sabbath the same armed super-loyalists 
were present, but the friends of peace and order were 
absent. The preacher had great liberty in the service, 
and felt in no way intimidated by the presence of armed 
men on the front bench. During his earnest exhorta- 
tion, founded upon a favorite text, the men became 
somewhat excited, but they had either not chosen a 
leader or the leader showed the white feather. They 
kept calling one upon the other to start — " You start, 
and I will follow." "No, you start, and I will follow," 


were expressions, though whispered, that could be dis- 
tinctly heard by those near them. Such things did not 
deter the preacher. They could not browbeat him 
down, and finally, in their shame, they vented their pique 
on a luckless dog that lay stretched out on the floor 
near them. 

After this frutless attempt to frighten these faithful 
and devout men and women, and to get some pretext 
for adding another name to the list of Missouri Martyrs, 
they surceased their persecutions, modified their preju- 
dices, toned down their spirit, and from enemies some 
of them have become the fast friends and even the zeal- 
ous converts of the sect that was " everywhere spoken 

Such scenes of suffering, trial and danger, simply be- 
cause the victim was a minister of the gospel, recalls 
the persecutions of other times, and re-enacts a history 
which we had vainly hoped would not darken the annals 
of the nineteenth century. 

While the details of these dark scenes are stripped of 
all extra coloring that the naked facts may appear, the 
ever active imagination will, despite our soberest efforts, 
supply the want, and memory will be busy with the his- 
tory of other times and other countries until Missouri 
is forgotten ; the finest model of human government 
ever devised by man crumbles into dust; the much 
vaunted religious liberty expires upon its own dese- 
crated altars j the light of a boasted civilization fades into 
darkness ; the noblest and freest institutions go down in 
hopeless barbarism; a pure, non-political Christianity, 
with a non-juring ministry, are called upon to reproduce 
the agony of the Garden and the tragedy of Calvary 


without repeating the work and grace of atonement, 
and in memory we are living over the times of Charles 
the Fifth, Montmorenci and the Duke of Ava. 
The spirits of the French Huguenots, the "Waldenses, 
Yaudois Martyrs and Bohemian Protestants have been 
reproduced in the ministry of Missouri. " Why do the 
heathen rage and the people imagine a vain thing ? The 
kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take 
counsel together against the Lord and against his 
anointed, saying, 'Let "us break their bands asunder and 
cast awav their cords from us/ " 




Rev. R. N. T. Holliday — Statement of his Persecutions Furnished 
by Dr. Richmond, a Federal Officer — Could not War upon the 
Institutions of Heaven — Mr. Holliday aloof from Politics — Mis- 
construed — General W. P. Hall and" his Militia Proclamation — 
General Hall and Mr. Holliday — General Bassett — Rev. Wm. 
Toole, Provost Marshal, and Mr. Holliday — A Renegade — Platte 
City Burned by Jennison and Mr. H. Ordered to be Shot on Sight 
— He Escapes — Is Arrested in Clinton County — Again Ordered to 
be Shot — Escapes to Illinois — Returns in 1865 — Goes to Shelbyville 
and is Indicted for Preaching Without Taking the Oath — Crimes 
of the War — Common Law Maxim Reversed — Prominent Minis- 
ters of the M. E. Church, South, Assumed to be Guilty of Treason 
— Murder of Rev. Green Woods — Birth, Early Ministry and Gen- 
eral Character — Gives up his District — Retires to his Farm in Dent 
County — Affecting Account of his Murder given by his Daughter 
— Extract from a Letter Written by his Wife — Details Published 
in the St. Louis Advocate of June 13, 1866 — Reflections. 

Rev. R. N". T. Holliday. 

The following account of the persecutions of this good 
and useful minister of the gospel is furnished by Dr. 
Oregon Richmond, "who was an officer in the Fed- 
eral army, and always anxious for the triumph of the 
Union forces." Upon that ground he properly claims 
the absence of undue bias from his statement. The 
whole case is so fully and minutely reported that it 
needs neither introduction nor comment to aid in a due 
appreciation of the facts : 

"Canton, Mo., March 8, 1869. 

"At the request of Rev. R. N. T. Holliday, I have 
consented to put together and transmit the somewhat 
remarkable events of that period of his life connected 


with the late war troubles. This request is the result 
of an antipathy on his part to acting the part of a self- 
eulogist. In my judgment no greater eulogy can be 
written of a minister of the gospel than that of a calm, 
unvarnished recital of the persecution to which that 
class of our citizens was subjected during the preval- 
ence of, and immediately subsequent to, the late war. 

"And perhaps, after all, it is but simple justice that 
these facts should be written by one who was an officer 
in the Federal army, and always anxious for the tri- 
umph of the Union forces. Though an officer in the 
Union army, he can thank God that his military life is 
unstained by a single act of cruelty or persecution ; and, 
above all, is he thankful that he never made use of his 
military power to war against the institutions of Hea- 
ven or the chosen instruments ordained for their estab- 
lishment amongst men. In other words, he was not 
attached to a Missouri regiment, is not a son of Missouri, 
and hence has never been instructed in the mysteries 
of that department of military tactics that teaches the 
wonderful doctrine that the truest patriotism consists 
in the abuse of defenseless women and children, and 
the subversion of the sublimest precepts of religion 
by the persecution and murder of its chosen apostles. 

"In September, 1860, Eev. E. K T. Holliday, the 
.subject of this sketch, was appointed by the Missouri 
Conference of the M. E. Church, South, of which he has 
long been a member, to Bushville, in Buchanan county, 
Mo. In the ensuing spring the war commenced, but it 
was not until May, 1861, that he received the first inti- 
mation of the approaching trouble that would draw 


him into its clutches, and ultimately make him a wan- 
derer and an exile from his chosen field of usefulness. 

" About that time a Union meeting was held near 
Bushville, and addressed by Hon. "Willard P. Hall and 
others from St. Joseph. Mr. Holliday was urged to be 
present and reply on behalf of the South ; this he de- 
clined to do. He was not even present at the meeting, 
believing that ministers of the gospel should keep them- 
selves unspotted from the political strifes of men. Yet 
his enemies said that he stayed away through personal 
fear, and he was henceforth the subject of various kinds 
of annoyances and petty persecutions. 

"The Conference of September, 1861, returned Mr. 
Holliday to Bushville. He was not molested until 
March, 1862, when Brig.-General "W. P. Hall issued a 
proclamation requiring all men subject to military duty 
to enroll themselves in the State militia. Mr. Holliday 
refused to enroll, upon the ground that ministers were 
exempt from military duty. Gen. Hall sent him word 
at once, that if he did not enroll he would have him ar- 
rested. Mr. Holliday replied that, being exempt from 
military duty by the laws of the State, he could but 
consider the demand extra-official, and if an arrest must 
be the result of non-compliance with an illegal demand, 
he preferred to be arrested. Upon this General Hall 
addressed a note to Mr. H. in the politest terms, request- 
ing an interview to arrange the difficulty. Trusting 
the General's honor, Mr. Holliday complied; but, upon 
presenting himself at headquarters, the General refused 
to see him, and ordered him taken to the Provost-Mar- 
shal's office for enrollment. Gen. Bassett, the Provost- 
Marshal, had the entrance to his office securely guarded 


after Mr. H. was admitted, and informed him that he 
must enroll under Order 19, as a Union man, and submit 
to a physical examination, or under Order 24, as a rebel 
sympathizer, and pay a commutation fee of $30. Find- 
ing submission inevitable, or something worse, Mr. H. 
registered under Order 24, but refused to pay the com- 
mutation as an unlawful and an unauthorized exaction, 
and demanded his exemption papers as a minister of the 
gospel, at the same time producing his ordination 
parchments. General Bassett, after some delay, gave 
him exemption papers, and, after considerable annoy- 
ance, he gave him a pass also, which enabled him to 
travel back and forth and fill his appointments without 
further molestation than an occasional petty persecution, 
the instigation of malice, and an occasional threat of 
being shot. 

"During the summer of 1852 Mr. Bassett was super- 
seded in the office of Provost-Marshal by a Mr. W. 
Tool, who had been up to that period a minister in the 
M. E. Church, South. He had, however, apostatized, 
and joined the M. E. Church, North. 

"Mr. Bassett's brief apprenticeship in villainy fitted 
him for, and he was appointed to, a higher office. Mr. 
Holliday was requested to fill the pulpit made vacant 
by the military prohibition upon Rev. W. M. Bush, of 
St. Joseph, and the ladies of the church in which Mr. 
Bush had been silenced waited on Provost-Marshal 
Tool and requested permission for Mr. Holliday to fill 
the silent pulpit. Mr. Tool, who was acting in the 
interest of the North Methodists, refused to permit Mr. 
H. to come to St. Joseph to preach the gospel. 

"In September, 1862, Mr. Holliday was sent to Platte 


City, and there remained unmolested until the following 
June, when soldiers from Kansas took his horse, which 
he never saw afterward. He borrowed another, which 
was also stolen and carried off. He thus lost two horses 
in as many weeks. 

"About the middle of July, 1863, Col. Jennison, of 
Kansas, went to Platte City and burned the town. His 
men were ordered to shoot Mr. Holliday down at sight. 
Knowing the- character of Jennison' s men, and being 
apprised of the order by a Union man, Mr. H. made 
good his escape, leaving his family at Mr. Redman's. 
On the evening of his fight his house, containing all that 
he had in the world, except what the family had on, 
was given to the flames. His family were thus made 
destitute and reduced to beggary. 

" The next day, at 3 p. M., Mr. Holliday was arrested, 
by order of a Clinton county militia captain, and taken 
to Plattsburg. He was there subject to some indigni- 
ties, until Mr. Cockrell informed Captain Irvine, com- 
mander of the post, of the facts, who, being a gentleman 
and a Mason, ordered the instant release of Mr. Holliday. 

"The next day Capt. Irvine was killed in an engage- 
ment with the rebels. This very much enraged the 
militia, and an order was issued again to shoot Mr. H. 
on sight. He again made his escape by flight and con- 
cealment. He remained ten days at the residence of 
Mr. Powell, of Clinton county, but upon hearing of the 
order to shoot him,he, with two other ministers, Messrs. 
Tarwater and Jones, took refuge in the woods, and 
made their way on foot to Osborn, where Mr. Holliday 
met his family, and all took the train to Quincy, 111. 
They remained in Illinois until the war closed, in 1864, 


doing the best he could as a minister of the gospel. Re- 
turning to Missouri in 1865, he met the Conference at 
Hannibal, and was appointed to the Shelbyville circuit. 

" By this time the New Constitution had been declared 
the fundamental law of the State, and under it all min- 
isters of the gospel were required to take the iron-clad 
' test oath ' as a qualification for the work of the minis- 
try, or subject themselves to arrest, indictment, fine or 

"Actuated by the same motives of conscience that 
impelled all true ministers of the gospel, he promptly 
refused to take and subscribe said oath. He was, there- 
fore, arrested and indicted by the grand jury of Shelby 
county for preaching and teaching as a minister of the 
gospel without having, under oath, attested his past and 
present loyalty to the Government of the United States. 
The said indictment bore the signatures of Wm. M. 
Boulware, Circuit Attorney, E. S. Holliday, Foreman 
of Grand Jury, and James Ealph, C. E. Colton and 
Wm. Colton as witnesses. A copy of the indictment 
is in Mr. Holliday's possession, to be handed down to 
his children as a memento of his sufferings and triumphs 
in the cause of his Master. It will doubtless make their 
faith doubly strong in the principles of that holy re- 
ligion for which he endured so much privation, persecu- 
tion and personal danger. 

" Mr. Holliday was subsequently indicted for the 
same offense, and held in a bond of $500 for appearance 
at the November term of the Shelby Court. Mr. M. 
C. Hawkins, a lawyer of Canton, made an able argu- 
ment on a motion to quash the indictment, which motion 
was not sustained, and the case was continued to the 


ensuing May term, when a nolle pros equi was entered 
and Mr. Holliday released. 

"The facts above narrated I have received from Mr. 
Holliday's own lips. He was so reticent of matters con- 
cerning himself personally that I can not but regard this 
as a very meagre epitome of all that he was required to 
do and to suffer in the performance of the work his 
Master gave him to do. He evidently is already richly 
rewarded in the depths of his own consciousness, and 
justly decided that nothing man may say for him can 
serve in the smallest degree to increase that reward. 
"[Signed] Oregon Kichmond." 

The persecutions in the early part of the war were 
not without a sharp discrimination in favor of the prom- 
inent ministers of the M. E. Church, South. Few were 
exempt. The exceptional cases were either in the large 
cities or under the protection of partisan loyalty. For 
some reason the leading ministers of the Church, South, 
were looked upon as the very ringleaders of the South- 
ern revolt against the Government. So general was 
this belief amongst the officers of the Union army, that 
whoever escaped their surveillance had to prove a nega- 
tive in the face of the most unwarranted and unfounded 
presumptions of guilt, supported and flanked by the 
deepest rooted prejudices and the most blinded passion. 
Nor is this putting the ease too strongly. It is not in 
excess of the facts. 

No matter how guarded, how prudent, how cautious 
in public or private life, the tongue of the accuser 
always reached the official ear before the accused was 
aware of his summons to the official ball*. 

That good old maxim of the English common law, 


that assumed a man to be innocent until he was proven 
to be guilty, was reversed. Men were assumed to be 
guilty, and they had to prove their innocence if they 
could, or suffer the penalty of assumed guilt. 

And, indeed, the right of trial was granted to but few. 
Many, very many, suffered imprisonment and death 
without ever being so much as informed of the crime for 
which they suffered. 

The day of eternity alone will reveal the nameless 
crimes which men in authority, and men without au- 
thority, committed during the late civil war. May a 
merciful Providence forever spare the country a repeti- 
tion of the horrible scenes through which it has so re- 
cently passed. These reflections are suggested by the 
murder of the 

Eev. Green Woods. 

The subject of this sketch was born in Bellevue, 
Washington county, Missouri, Feb. 27, 1814, where he 
grew up on a farm in sight of Caledonia. 

He was received on trial in the Missouri Annual Con- 
ference M. E. Church in the fall of 1836, when the Con- 
ference was held in St. Louis, and was appointed by 
Bishop Boberts, junior preacher on the Farmington Cir- 
cuit, with George Smith as his senior. 

The next year he was returned by Bishop Soule to 
Farmigton, with Alvin Baird as his senior. 

The next year his name does not appear in the min- 
utes, nor does it appear again until the year 1853, when 
he rejoined the St. Louis Conference and was appointed 
by Bishop Andrew to Cape Girardeau and Jackson. 

In 1854 he was appointed to Ste. Genevieve Circuit, 


and at the Conference of 1855, at Springfield, he was 
received into full connection, and returned to Ste. Gen- 
evieve Circuit, with J. H. dimming as junior preacher. 

It is needless to follow his appointments in the Con- 
ference further than to soy that everywhere he was well 
received and always well reported of for good works. 
He was a diligent and faithful laborer in his Master's 
vineyard, and few men stood higher in the estimation 
of the people or was more securely enthroned in their 
affections. He was a man of unblemished character, 
unswerving integrity, unwavering fidelity, deep and 
fervent piety, and of good preaching ability. He was 
unobtrusive, unostentatious, civil, courteous, gentle and 
kind to all; had many friends and few enemies — lived 
for his work, and attended strictly to his own business. 
The last man who would ever intermeddle with politics 
or make himself officious or offensive to any man or 
party of men. He had charity for all, and malice for 
none. This is written by one who knew him well, and 
loved him much, and was a member of the same class of 
undergraduates in the Conference. 

When the war broke out Mr. Woods was Presiding 
Elder on the Greenville District, St. Louis Conference; 
was extensively known in Southern and Southeastern 
Missouri, and had been just as extensively useful. But 
the troubles thickened so fast and the country was so 
generally disturbed and distracted that with a heavy 
heart he gave up his regular work on the district and 
contented himself with such preaching as he could do 
near his home in Dent county, while he attended to the 
cultivation of his little farm. 

The following account of the events of 1862, furnished 


by his eldest daughter, will be read with deep interest, 
as they culminate in the awful tragedy of his murder: 

" In the spring of 1862 the excitement in the country 
became so intense that my father could no longer travel 
his district, so he thought he would stay at home and 
try to make enough to support his family on his farm. 
As the people in the neighborhood desired him to 
preach to them, he made an appointment to preach, 
about three miles from home, the second Sunday in May. 
He filled this appointment, and announced another at 
the same place for the second Sunday in June. Before 
that time arrived he was advised by some of his friends 
not to go to his appointment, as they believed that he 
would be taken prisoner, and perhaps killed, that day by 
the soldiers if he attempted to preach. But he told 
them that he would go and preach, and if the soldiers 
wished to arrest him they could do so ; that if necessary 
he could go to jail. He said that he did not believe that 
they would kill him, as he had not done anything to be 
killed for. 

A man by the name of Silas Hamby, a member of the 
Methodist Church, North, had said some time before 
that no Southern Methodist preacher should preach at 
Mount Pleasant again. But my father thought it was 
an idle threat, as he had heard of no preacher being 
killed because he was a preacher. 

"When Sunday morning came, father and my sister, 
younger than myself, went to Mount Pleasant, and he 
preached to a small congregation — the people being 
afraid to turn out on account of the soldiers — and re- 
turned home the same evening unmolested. The next 
morning he took my sister — just thirteen — and two little 


boys he had hired, and went out to a field one mile from 
home to finish planting corn. While they were at work 
the mother of the boys came by the field on her way to 
our house. She saw that they were nearly done, so she 
thought she would wait till they finished and come along 
with them. By this means there was one grown person 
present to witness his arrest. I think it was about the 
middle of the forenoon of that Monday, June 9, 1862, 
when sixteen men, armed and uniformed as Federal 
soldiers, came to our house and surrounded it. They 
inquired for father. Mother told them that he was not 
at home, but out in the field (father told her if they 
came and called for him, to tell them where he 
was). They made a general search, and then huddled 
up out in the yard and held a council a few minutes. 
Five of them were sent to the field, and while they were 
gone those at the house were stealing everything they 
could get their hands on that belonged to father, leaving 
very few things behind. 

" When the five soldiers got to the field father was 
not quite done planting. They rode up and asked if his 
name was Green Woods; he told them it was. They 
told him that he was the man they were after, and 
ordered him to alight over the fence. He asked them 
if they would not wait until he could finish planting, as 
he had then but a few short rows; but they told him, 
with an oath, that they were in a hurry, and kept hur- 
rying him while he was getting his horse ready to start. 
When they started from the field my sister asked them 
what they intended to do with father. They told her, 
with an oath, that it was uncertain where he would get 
to before he came back. They brought him to the 


house and allowed him to eat his dinner. But when he 
went to dress himself, he could not find a change of 
clothes, as the soldiers had taken all that he had, and 
would not even give him his pants and hat. They took 
him about three miles from home, to a man's house by 
the name of Jones, and pretended to get evidence against 
him. (This was north-west from where we live). They 
then took him about three miles from home, to where a 
man lived named Peter Sidles, who kept a blacksmith's 
shop. They stopped and staid there awhile, and 
searched the house, as Skiles was a Southern man. 
They then took father about half a mile and killed him, 
and left him lying out in the woods away from the road 
— no one knew where except those who placed him 
there. Two guns were heard after the soldiers left 

" This was done on Monday, and his body was not 
found till the next Monday. "We did not know that he 
was killed until his body was found. When found he 
was lying on his back with his overcoat spread on the 
ground under him ; one arm was stretched out one way, 
and the other stretched out the other way, his hat drawn 
down over his face, his coat and vest and left glove ly- 
ing on the ground near him, his right glove on, his left 
shirt sleeve torn off, and his left hand off and gone. He 
seemed to have been dragged some two or three hundred 
yards before he was shot, as there was but little blood 
along the trail, and was found as above described near 
a lar^e tree and among; some low bushes. 

" We have heard several times that the Northern 
Methodist presiding elder, by the name of Ing, sent the 


men to kill my father. I have given yon the substance 
of what we know of father's death. 

(Signed) " Josephine M. A. M. Woods, 

"Eldest Daughter, 
"E. A. Woods, Wife, and 
" Mary Louisa, Daughter of 
"Kev. Green Woods." 
Mrs. Woods furnishes the following additional par- 
ticulars : 

"While eating his dinner the soldiers asked him if he 
did not think he ought to have taken the oath — meaning 
the oath of allegiance which all citizens were required 
to take. He replied that he would be candid with them, 
as he tried to be with all men; that it afforded no pro- 
tection, as only the day before the soldiers had been 
taking the property and breaking the guns of those who 
had taken the oath, and he could not see that the oath 
had profited them any. They hurried him much to 
finish his dinner. He asked them for his hat, which 
they refused to give him. He said that he would then 
wear his old one, and be with his equals — meaning that 
he was about as near worn out as his hat. 

" Thinking that it might have some good effect upon 
the soldiers, I reminded him, in their presence, that the 
meal was out, and asked what I must do, now that he 
was going away. He replied, 'the Lord will provide.' 
And, so far, it is literally true; the Lord has been merci- 
ful to give us our daily bread, as we have never had a 
single meal without bread. 

" When he started he told me to do the best I could, 
and seemed to have a presentment that he would never 


u On the way that evening he was stopped at the 
house of Dr. Boyd. While there he said to Mrs. Boyd, 
'Tell Mrs Woods that you saw me here.' Mrs. Boyd 
also heard him tell the soldiers to hurry up and take him 
wherever they intended to take him; that they would 
keep him in the hot sun till he would be down sick. 
They replied that they had a good doctor. He had been 
very sick only a short time before. It was his custom 
to hold family worship night and morning, no matter 
what else was to do. The last day of his life he read 
for the morning lesson the thirty-seventh Psalm." 

Strenuous efforts have been made to obtain the names 
of the guilty parties, with but little success. The fol- 
lowing statement is the latest and most reliable : 

"A man by the name of Dennis was the pilot, and it 
is said helped do the shooting. A man named Wells 
was in the company. We can not give the first names 
of either of these men now, but have the promise of 

" A young man named Bill Fudge, the son of North 
Methodists who were once members of the Southern 
Methodist Church, and another named Harrison Batliff, 
it is said, helped commit the murder." 

To the question, "What evidence have you that Ing, 
the North Methodist presiding elder, sent the men to 
commit the murder?" the following reply was furnished : 

"All the evidence we have that Ing sent the men is, 
that he was their commander at the time; and it has 
been told, by those who said they saw it, that father's 
hand was carried to Ing as proof that they had killed 
him, and that he still had it in his possession a year or 
two ago. 

" Eespectfully, Josie M. A. M. Woods." 


When Mr. Woods' dead body was found, "his left 
hand was off and gone." Common rumor in the com- 
munity, and the statement of several reliable gentlemen 
— which may hereafter be given — go to confirm this 
horrible and savage report about the hand. 

The following account of the affair was published in 
the St. Louis Christian Advocate, of June 13, 1866, and 
signed " K.," of Crawford county : 

"Kev. Green Woods.— Mr. Editor; In the letter of 
your California correspondent, in last week's Advocate, 
the names of several ministers formerly connected with 
the St. Louis Conference are mentioned with that of the 
lamented Green Woods, who the writer too truly 
mentions as having been cruelly murdered in the sum- 
mer of 1862. And, as the writer of this sketch had 
known the deceased for many years, and was living in 
an adjoining county at the time the cruel murder was 
committed, he may be able to furnish some facts relative 
thereto that would interest his many friends and ac- 
quaintances of by-gone days. He was at the time (1862) 
living at his home, in Dent county, Mo., on a little farm 
that he was quietly cultivating with his own hands, and 
had been guilty of no other offense that that of preach- 
ing through the county in which he lived every Sunday, 
and oftener as he found opportunity. And, at the time 
he was torn from his weeping wife and little ones, he 
was at home plowing in his field, when suddenly he was 
surrounded by men wearing the uniform of soldiers, and 
hailing from Kansas — regular ( Jaykawkers.' How 
many broken-hearted wives and mothers, and destitute 
orphan children, throughout Missouri will have cause 
to remember these cruel 'Kansas Jayhawkers !' The 


cruel assassination of loved husbands and fathers; the 
burnt and blasted homesteads, where lonely chimneys 
only are left to tell the tale of once happy and contented 
households now scattered and torn by the ruthless storm 
of war in the wake of these Kansas desperadoes. Truly 
the fate of Missouri has been hard; and of many it may 
be said they are strangers in their own land. 

11 When informed by them that he must go with them 
as a prisoner, and probably knowing from the fate of 
others what he might expect of them, he told them that 
he had violated no law, that he was a minister of the 
Methodist Church, South, and that if they intended to 
kill him, he was not afraid to die. Then taking, as he 
well believed, a sad and final farewell of his wife and 
little children, he started with his captors to the town 
of Salem, as he thought. But, alas ! what must have 
been the agony of the fond wife when she learned, seve- 
ral days afterward, that he had not been taken to Salem 
at all ! Diligent search but confirmed her worst fears. 
He had been taken about two miles from home by the 
road side and shot. There the mortal remains of Green 
Woods were found — a cold and lifeless corpse — with the 
fatal bullet shot through the head. 

"In contemplating such a scene as this, how the heart 
saddens and sickens to know that humble and devoted 
ministers of the cross are put to death for no other cause 
than that of being ministers of the M. E. Church, South. 
Is it because that Church has been, and still is, in the 
way of those who profess to have all the piety, loyalty 
and religion in the land, that its members and ministers 
are specially denounced, proscribed and persecuted, and 


arc the marks of special vengeance for every gang of 
raiding soldiers that chance to come into Missouri? 

"I am credibly informed that the deceased had never 
taken any part in the excitement growing out of the 
war up to that time ; that he had never mentioned 
politics in the pulpit, and had never left home on account 
of the troubles during all the dark days of '61 and '62. 

"Kev. Green Woods was a native of Missouri, and 
through many portions of Southern and Southeastern 
Missouri will he be remembered, as his powerful and 
eloquent voice echoed and died away upon the gently 
murmuring breezes of his native hills and vales in call- 
ing sinners to repentance. But he now sleeps the long 
sleep of death. That clarion voice is now silent, and 
will no more be heard on earth proclaiming the good 
news and glad tidings of salvation which shall be unto 
all people. But we close, and drop a silent tear to his 
memory; knowing that He who holdeth the earth in 
the hollow of his hand, and who numbereth the very 
hairs of our head*, doeth all things well. 

"We have good reason to believe that the religion he 
so long and faithfully preached to others sustained him 
in the last trying hour; and in the great day, when all 
mankind shall stand forth to be judged according to the 
deeds done in the body, many will rise up and call him 
blessed. B." 

Thus passed away, by the hand of violence, one of the 
excellent of the earth, "of whom the world was not 
worthy." A faithful witness for the word of God and 
the testimony of Jesus, having committed no offense 
against the laws of God or man, he fell a martyr to the 
truth; gave his life for a principle and a cause, and 


offered himseif upon the service and sacrifice of bis 
chosen Church, and the faith she vindicates in his death, 
and ascended the thrones of martyrdom, to await, with 
the martyrs of all ages, the final and glorious triumph 
of the Kingdom of Messiah, in whose service he counted 
not his life dear unto himself. It is a grand thought 
that Infinite Goodness and Power has ordained that 
" Christ must reign till he hath put all enemies under 
his feet." "Then cometh the end." " Even so: come 
Lord Jesus." 




Rev. A. Monroe, the Patriarch of Missouri Methodism — Age.Honor and 
Sanctity not Exempt from Profanation — Mr. Monroe and his Wife 
Arrested in Fayette — Mrs. Monroe's Trials and Witty Retorts — How 
Mr. Monroe Escaped the Bond — 'Robbed of Everything by Kansas 
Soldiers in 1864 — An Old Man Without his Mittens — A Tower of 
Strength — "< >ur Moses " — Calls the Palmyra Convention — Rev. W. 
M. Rush — The Character of Missouri Preachers — A Native 
Missourian — Settles in Chillicothe — In St. Joseph the First Year of 
the War — Caution in Public Worship — An Offensive Prayer by 
Rev. W. C. Toole — General Loan Closes the Church and Deposes 
Mr. Rush from the Ministry by Military Order — General W. P. 
Hall vs. Mr. Rush— Hall Publishes a Letter that Denies Mr. Rush 
Protection, and Exposes him to Assassination — Mr. Rush Returns 
to Chillicothe — His House a Stable and his Home a Desolation — 
Bold Attempt to Assassinate him — Correspondence with General 
Hall — Goes to St. Louis — Masonic Endorsement— In Charge of the 
Mound Church — Will Hear of Him Again — Rev. Nathaniel Wot- 
lard Murdered in Dallas County — Horrible Details — Particulars — 

Eev. Andrew Monroe. 

Even this venerable and honored servant of God — 
now the Patriarch of Missouri Methodism — was not ex- 
empt from trials and troubles during the late war. If 
a venerable form, erect and majestic; grey locks, long 
and flowing ; lofty mien, benign and saintly ; a pure life, 
long and useful; an honored name, associated with the 
history of the good and pure in the State; saintly be- 
neficence, sanctified to the highest purposes of the gos- 
pel, and a meek and quiet spirit diffused through the 
toil, and suffering, and labor, and triumphs of half a cen- 
tury in the ministry could disarm malice, awe the pas- 
sions into reverence, break the force of prejudice and 


shield the person and property, the home and happiness, 
the liberty and life from vicious violation and petty 
profanation, then Andrew Monroe had lived in peace 
unmolested, and his humble house, a freeman's sacred 
castle, been secure from the tread of vandalism and the 
hand of plunder. But no altar was too sacred, no home 
too pure, no name too greatly reverenced and no life 
too pure and holy to deter the invader or wither the 
sacrilegious hand of the spoiler. Meanness was not an 
incident of the war, and sacrilege was not confined to 
Mexican guerrillas. Men are naturally mean, and de- 
pravity is a fact of human nature. Nor did the war make 
thieves, and robbers, and murderers, and highwaymen; 
they were such before, the occasion only was wanting. 
The sunbeam does not create, it only reveals the motes 
in the atmosphere. The war furnished the occasion and 
unveiled the meanness of men ; the pure gospel ministry 
rebuked it, and, naturally enough, provoked its malice 
and became its victim. Even Andrew Monroe, the noble 
old Roman, could not escape. 

In the winter of 1862 the Eev. A. Monroe was travel- 
ing the Fayette Circuit, Missouri Conference M. E. 
Church, South, and living in the town of Fayette, How- 
ard county. Fayette, like all other towns of importance 
in the State, was a military post, with one Major Hub- 
bard in command. 

One day of that winter Mr. Monroe and his family 
were surprised by the appearance of a Federal officer 
and a squad of men entering bis humble home, placing 
him and his wife under arrest, and marching them off 
to headquarters, for what offense they never knew. 

The soldiers had arrested many other ladies and gen- 


tlemen at the same time, and they had plenty of com- 
pany when they reached headquarters, amongst whom 
was the Eev. Dr. W. H. Anderson, then President of 
Central College. 

"When Major Hubbard came in and saw the number 
of ladies present under arrest he affected surprise, and 
said that he had not ordered their arrest j that his subal- 
terns had transcended his orders, and at once informed 
the ladies that they were released, remarking at the 
same time that when he wished to see them he would not 
send for them, but do himself the pleasure of calling at 
their homes. To which Mrs. Monroe promptly replied 
that she was obliged to him for releasing them so early, 
but as for seeing him, she had no desire whatever to see 
him at her house or anywhere else. 

Many a true and modest woman had occasion during 
those troublous times to call upon her ready wit to reply 
to the various impertinent inquiries and demands of a 
ruffian soldiery ; and while Mrs. Monroe was surprised 
at her own courage, her indignation was somewhat ap- 
peased when she observed the cutting effect of her 
retort. 'Not many days afterward she had occasion 
again for her ready wit and her Christian fortitude and 
forbearance. Very early in the morning five soldiers 
called and demanded breakfast. Mr. Monroe was at 
home, but he soon retreated from the front door and 
called upon his wife to meet the issue. She had no 
help, and the idea of cooking for so many, and these, 
too, whom she believed to be her enemies, and who 
would not hesitate to do her any injury, was very re- 
pulsive. But to get rid of them was a difficult question, 
as many ladies know. By the time she reached the 


front door and heard their request her answer was ready. 
She replied, " My Bible teaches me, ' If thine enemy 
hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink;' upon 
these terms and no other you can get breakfast." To 
her surprise one of them said, "Madam, we will accept 
breakfast upon those terms, for I profess to be some- 
what acquainted with the Bible." She thought they 
would turn and go away in a rage, but, on the contrary, 
she had to turn and get breakfast for a her enemies " 
with the best grace she could. 

It turned out that the spokesman was a local preacher 
in the Northern Methodist Church, and at the table he 
remarked to Mrs. Monroe that his father was as great a 
rebel as she was. To which she replied, that it was a 
thousand pities that he had so far departed from the 
ways of his father as to be a degenerate son of an hon- 
ored sire. Whereupon he said, "As a loyal man, I 
would hate awfully to have to live with such a rebel. 
G-en. Price could well afford to issue a commission to 
you, madam." 

Not many days after this Mr. Monroe was just ready 
to mount his "horse one morning for a tour of appoint- 
ments in the country, when a soldier appeared with 
orders to arrest him and take him to the headquarters 
of Capt. Hale, then commanding the post. The vener- 
able man of God was then marched up to headquarters 
at the point of the bayonet and required to take the 
military oath, (so-called), and give bond, with good se- 
curity, for his future loyalty to the Government, and for 
the loyalty and good order of his family, the Captain 
remarking that " the secesh talk of the women of his 
family should be stopped." Mr. Monroe replied that 


he could take the oath if he would then let him go about 
his blaster's work, but as for the bond, he must excuse 
him, as he did not wish to involve his friends and he 
had but little property. If it was his little property he 
was after, he might as well go and take charge of that at 
once and let him go about his business. The Captain 
saw the point and told him to take the oath then and 
"go preach the gospel to every creature," 

"In 1864: Mr. Monroe was living on a farm about 
eight miles from Glasgow, in Howard county, when 
General Price made his famous raid into Central Mis- 
souri, and took Glasgow amongst other places. The 
day before the battle of Glasgow Mr. Monroe was out 
in a field on his little farm, and his family all away from 
home except a servant, when a company of Kansas 
soldiers passing along the road halted, entered the house 
and robbed it of everything of value they could find. 
The house was literally pillaged. Mr. Monroe's watch, 
a fine cloth coat, several pairs of bed-blankets, quilts, 
comforts, and, indeed, everything of any value to them. 
While thus engaged they saw a young man who lived 
near approaching the house, all unconscious of what was 
going on. He was arrested and relieved of all his 
money, $75. One rough-looking Dutch soldier rode out 
to the field and accosted the venerable man with an 
imperative demand for his money. When he found that 
he had but two dollars in the world, he would not take 
it, but rode back in disgust. A } r oung man — Mr. Mon- 
roe's nephew — was met near the house on his uncle's 
only riding horse, with his only saddle and bridle. The 
young man was arrested, and the horse and equipments 
taken to Glasgow and never heard from afterward. 


Thus, in one single hour, the venerable servant of 
God stood alone in his field, stripped of everything he 
had — horse, watch, clothes, blankets, bedding — every- 
thing of value. What must have been the feelings of 
Mrs. Monroe on returning home, after an absence of 
just one hour, to find her house plundered by a ruffian 
soldiery, and her husband beggared. To complete the 
work, a small squad of soldiers passed along soon after- 
ward, and when they could find nothing else to steal 
or appropriate, a rough, drunken Dutchman demanded 
of the old man his woolen mittens, which a lady had 
but recently given him. He gave them up, and con- 
sidered himself fortunate to get off so easy. 

With such petty annoyances, involving privation and 
suffering, this faithful minister of the gospel— this pioneer 
and patriarch of Missouri Methodism — j>assed through 
the dark and trying scenes of the late civil war, always 
hopeful and joyful, and ready to rejoice that he was 
counted worthy to suffer for a cause of which himself 
was the finest type, and a principle to maintain which he 
was willing to go even to prison and to death. To the 
struggling cause of Christ and his suffering friends he 
was a tower of strength, to the discomfited and dis- 
heartened hosts of the Methodist Israel, he was "our 
Moses." When " these calamities were overpassed/' 
and the shock of war had expended its fire and force — 
when the smoke of battle cleared away, and the storm- 
cloud hung low upon the horizon, he surveyed the field, 
marked the desolation, measured the extent of the 
wreck, discovered some remains of Zion's former beauty, 
while others, with indecent haste, sounded her funeral 
knell ; and his voice, like that of a might}' chieftain, was 


heard over the prairies, along the railroads and in the 
cities of Missouri, calling the faithful to duty, and rally- 
ing the scattered forces for counsel. "Upon his call a 
few ministers and friends convened in Palmyra, in June, 
1865, and decreed the life of the Church, the resuscita- 
tion of her vital powers, the recovery of her lost ground, 
and the rehabilitation of her distinctive institutions and 
organs. (See the particulars of this Palmyra meeting 
in its appropriate place.) 

Eev. W. M. Bush. 

Pew men suffered earlier, or more, than the subject 
of this notice. For many years the name of the Eev. 
W. M. Push has been conspicuous on the rolls of Mis- 
souri Methodism. Prominent amongst her ablest and 
truest ministers and foremost in her aggressive evan- 
gelism, he has stood through many years of her history. 
Identified with her early struggles and a faithful laborer 
upon her broad foundations, he has grown with her 
growth and strengthened with her strength, until his 
life and her history are one. Few men have been more 
conspicuous in her councils or more distinguished in 
her fields of labor and conflict. The class-mate of Mar- 
vin, the senior and compeer of Caples, the companion 
of Monroe, and Jordan, and Smith, and Eacls, and John- 
son, and Redman, and the noble band o£ Methodist 
pioneers and patriots, his name will adorn the early 
annals of the Church, as it will illustrate her later per- 

Mr. Rush docs not care to conceal the fact that he is 
a native of Missouri. He was converted to God July 
8th, 1838, and united with the Methodist Church the 


following August. He was licensed to preach in Sept., 
1841, and was admitted on trial in the Conference the 
following October, at Palmyra, Bishop Morris presiding 
and W. AY. Redman acting as Secretary. He has ever 
been, since that date, an effective itinerant preacher — 
never sustained any other relation to the Conference. 

While traveling the Brunswick district, in 1856, and 
by the advice of Bishop Pierce, he made arrangements 
to settle his family in a permanent home, and selected 
Chillicothe, Livingston county, as the most central and 
suitable location. He purchased eligible lots, with land 
adjoining the town, and erected an excellent and com- 
modious residence for his large family. He also im- 
proved, furnished and stocked his adjoining lands to 
make them productive. Here he settled his family and 
remained until 1860, when he was appointed to St. 
Joseph station, and it became necessary for him to lease 
out his property in Chillicothe and move his family to 
St. Joseph, where he was living when the war broke 
out in 1861. He was deeply impressed with the neces- 
sity of caution and prudence in the conduct of his pulpit 
and public services, as the people to .whom he ministered 
were divided on the questions at issue in the war. He 
was so careful not to give offense to any that he framed 
a somewhat formal prayer to be used in public services 
touching the troubles of the country. 

It was about as follows : " O Thou, who art infinite in 
wisdom, in goodness and in power, we pray thee so to 
direct in the affairs of this country, that the events that 
are now transpiring may all result for thy glory and 
the we.l being of humanit}^. We pray that those in 
authority may have wisdom to direct them in adopting 


such measures as shall be promotive of the best interests 
of all the people."' 

To this form of prayer and the sentiments it contained 
he thought all good citizens of either party could say, 
Amen. He carefully abstained from eveiy expression 
that would be offensive to the sectional feelings and 
views of any of his congregation. In this he was par- 
ticular, and, he thought, successful. Matters passed on 
well enough until early in February, 1862, when, after 
preaching on Sabbath, he called on the Eev. W. C. 
Toole, a local preacher, to close the service with prayer. 
He was a strong partisan, and his language in the prayer 
was extremely bitter toward those in rebellion against 
the Government. Though the congregation was much 
divided in sentiment, they were at peace among them- 
selves. This prayer was like a firebrand. It excited a 
good deal of feeling, and people of opposite views thought 
it much out of place. Upon reflection and consultation 
with his leading brethren, he determined thereafter to 
close his own services with prayer, which ministers 
should always do unless other ministers are present and 
in the pulpit. He pursued this course but one Sabbath 
afterward, and then a brother minister, the Eev. S. W. 
Cope, preached for him, when, during the week follow- 
ing, Brigadier-General B. F. Loan, then in command, 
sent for Mr. Eush to report himself at his headquarters. 
This he did, and Gen. Loan told him that he had con- 
cluded to close his church. Mr. Eush asked him on what 
account. He replied, "Because of disloyalty." He 
was then asked in what respects they were disloyal, 
and answered that he was informed that a prayer for 
the Government could not be offered in that church 
without giving offense. 


The whole matter of the prayer of Mr. Toole and the 
general character of the service were then explained to 
Gen. Loan. Mr. Rush was careful to give the reasons 
for avoiding the introduction of anything savoring of 
sectional views into the public service ; that they could 
not settle the troubles of the country in the church ser- 
vice ; that such an effort would only destroy the peace 
of the church without in the least benefiting the 
country; that no prayer savoring of secession had ever 
been offered in the church or would be tolerated on any 
account; that the course pursued was the only proper 
one ; and that if all the churches in the land would at- 
tend to their appropriate work and let politics alone it 
would be far better for the country. To all of this the 
General replied that the time had come when there must 
be a distinction in the churches between patriots and 
traitors. Mr. Rush told him that he could not discrimi- 
nate in his church on account of political opinions; that 
he had been in the ministry more than twenty-five years, 
and in all that time he had not in a single instance, in 
prayer or sermon, given utterance to a word or sentence 
b} 7 which his opinions could be known upon any politi- 
cal questions at issue before the country, and that he did 
not expect in the future to depart from that course. 
He replied that his mind was made up to close the 
church. The interview ended, and the church was 

Soon afterward the General directed a special order 
to be issued forbidding Mr. Rush from preaching or con- 
ducting anj^ kind of religious service within the bounds 
of his military district. Thus he was silenced — deposed 
from the ministry, and his ordination credentials revoked 


by a military satrap. An ambassador for God stricken 
down by one stroke of a pen to which bayonets im- 
parted power ! A messenger of salvation to dying men 
silenced by the caprice of shoulder-straps, and one to 
whom the risen Messiah by his spirit said, u Go into all 
the world and preach the gospel to every creature," 
suspended from his divine commission by the decree of 
human power ! A " legate of the skies " at the feet of 
a miserable specimen of human weakness clothed with 
a little brief authority ! Impious presumption ! equaled 
only by sacrilegious contumely and prurient vanity. 

After Gen. Loan was dismissed from the military ser- 
vice by Gov. Gamble, and Gen. W. P. Hall had succeeded 
him in command of the district, Mr. Bush addressed a 
note to Gen. Hall, calling his attention to the order of 
Gen. Loan, and asking its revocation. Mr. Rush hoped 
for much consideration at the hands of Gen. Hall from 
a somewhat intimate acquaintance of sixteen years, and 
the further fact that at the beginning of the troubles 
their views were in perfect harmony. He had no doubt 
whatever but that the silencing order of Gen. Loan 
would at once be revoked. But for once he had mis- 
taken the man. Mr. B. did not then properly estimate 
the power of the German Badicals of the district nor 
the ambition of Gen. Hall — the necessity for him to 
manufacture a character for extreme loyalty, in doing 
which he would sacrifice any man or any principle that 
stood in the way of his personal promotion. 

Gen. Hall not only refused to revoke the order of 
Gen. Loan, but published in the St. Joseph Herald, a 
paper that circulated extensively in the military camps, 
his letter to Mr. Rush, in which the latter was denounced 


as a traitor and unworthy the protection of the Govern- 
ment. While Gen. Loan, in his personal intercourse 
with Mr. Bush, was courteous and gentlemanly, Gen. 
Hall was abusive, ungentlemanly and tyrannical. His 
published letter unveiled his true character, while it 
subjected its helpless victim to suspicion, insult and at- 
tempts at brutal assassination. 

Mr. Bush, in the midst of such trials and dangers, had 
to give up his charge and return to Chillicothe. Here 
he found his beautiful home laid waste ; the fencing de- 
stroyed, the house broken up, horses stabled in three 
rooms on the first floor, and soldiers quartered on the 
second floor, and the fruit and shrubbery all destroyed. 

He rented a house for his family, and while the officers 
of the post always treated him with courtesy and kind- 
ness, Gen. Hall's letter had stirred up the common sol- 
diery until his life and the lives of his family were in 
constant peril. When he discovered this state of things, 
he wrote Gen. Hall a polite letter, protesting against 
his published letter, representing the injustice he had 
done him, and the danger to his person and life caused 
by it. Gen. Hall returned his letter, and in reply threat- 
ened him with a military commission. 

About the 1st of May, 1863, a bold attempt was made 
to assassinate him in his own house. His house was 
first assailed with stones and brick-bats, by which the 
windows were crushed in and the door battered. Pistol 
shots were then fired through the doors and windows; 
but a kind Providence protected him and his family 
from serious injury. 

Upon reporting the facts to the officers in command, 
protection was promptly furnished, and a guard sta- 


tioned at the house. But, at the same time, the officers 
advised him to seek safety elsewhere ; that with all their 
efforts to protect him the assassin's missile might any 
moment put an end to his life. 

The week after this occurrence he w T ent to St. Louis 
to attend the sessions of the»Grand Masonic bodies of 
the State. These grand bodies gave to his ministerial 
and personal character their highest endorsement, by 
electing him Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge, also 
of the Grand Chapter, and also of the Convention of 
High Priests for the State of Missouri. 

The following is the written order which Gen. Loan 
directed Col. King, his subordinate, to issue deposing 
Mr. Rush from the functions of the ministry in his mili- 
tary district : 

"Headquarters Reg't M. S. M., ") 
Chillicothe, Mo., April 24, 1862. [ 

"Bev. TV. M. Bush, Chillicothe, Mo.: 

"Dear Sir — lam directed by the Brigadier-General 
commanding the district to notify you that it is deemed 
advisable and necessary to suspend you from the per- 
formance of your duties as a minister, or preacher, 
within this military district, so far as they relate to any 
of the public services in the church. This will, you ob- 
serve, include all preaching, the conducting of prayer 
meetings, &c, &c. Of said suspension you are hereby 

" This, I will add, results from information, deemed 
entirely reliable, of your disloyal sentiments, and of 
your very great desire to actively promote the cause of 
the traitors. 

" I am, sir, very respectfully, 

"Walter King, Col. M. S. M., 
"Commanding Chillicothe Post." 


Mr. Bush had been prohibited by verbal order from 
preaching in St. Joseph. After he left St. Joseph he 
preached once in Plattsburg and once in Chillicothe, 
whereupon General Loan ordered Colonel King to issue 
the above order. It was this order which Mr. Bush 
requested Gen. Hall to revoke. 

The reply to the letter asking the revocation of Gen. 
Loan's order, besides being published, was sent as a 
private note also, and is as follows : 

" Headquarters N". W. Dis., } 
St. Joseph, Mo., February 17, 1863. ) 

" Rev. W. M. Bush, Chillicothe, Mo. : 

"My Dear Sir — I am in receipt of yours of the 16th 
inst. I regret that I am not able to comply with your 
request. According to my views, a religious congrega- 
tion that can not endure prayers for its Government is 
disloj'al ; and a minister that encourages such a congre- 
gation in its course is also disloyal. 

"I agree with you, that allegiance and protection are 
reciprocal. But allegiance requires the citizen to pro- 
tect the Government against all enemies. This you not 
only refuse to do, but you are not willing to pray for 
the success of your Government over traitors. You 
claim to be neutral. A citizen has no right to be neutral 
when enemies are assailing his Government. 

u I can not relieve you from Gen. Loan's order. 
" Very respectfully, 

" "Willard P. Hall, 

"Brig.-Gen. Com'dg." 

The following letter was written to General Hall after 
Mr. Bush had suffered long and much from the effects 
of his published letter. It explains itself : 


« Chillicothe, Mo., April 30, 1863. 
"Gen. W. P. Hall: 

" Dear Sir : Some months ago I requested you to re- 
lieve me from Gen. Loan's order. This you declined to 
do, and at the same time (unintentionally, I hope,) in- 
flicted upon me a severe injury. Your letter was pub- 
lished in the Herald, and was made the basis of various 
actions against me. Dr. Hughs, who classified those 
who were exempt from military duty as loyal and dis- 
loyal, enrolled me disloyal. I asked him on what 
ground he so enrolled me, and told him that I claimed 
to be as loyal as any man in the Government, and that 
I challenged any man to show the contrary. He told 
me that he acted upon your letter and did not feel him- 
self authorized to go behind it. He assigned no other 
reason. Dr. Hughs, you may know, is an extreme Rad- 
ical man. 

" On the 1st of January Capt. Moore, Provost-Mar- 
shal of this post, gave what are called free passes to my 
negro woman and girl, and they are now in Kansas. I 
called on him to know on what ground he based his 
action. He said he concluded from your letter that I 
was rebellious, and, therefore, gave the passes without 
any charge or proof. 

"On the first Monday of April, at our municipal elec- 
tion, my vote was challenged by a Lieutenant from St. 
Joseph, I believe. I asked on what ground. He said 
my name was on the disloyal list. I told him T did not 
put it there. Capt. Moore said it was put there by or- 
der of Gen. Loan. 

" Such are some of the open effects of your published 


letter, and, as a lawyer, you doubtless know the extent 
of your legal responsibility for such publication. 

"In your published letter to me you regarded me as 
disloyal because, as you say, I encouraged a congrega- 
tion that could not endure prayers for its Government. 
If by the Government you mean the country and the 
Constitution, I beg to inform you that praj-ers are regu- 
larly offered for the country, in the public congregation 
as well as in my private family; and in private I pray 
to Him who is infinite in wisdom, in goodness and in 
power, that he would so direct in the affairs of the na- 
tion, and so control the events that are now transpiring 
as that all things might yet result for his glory and the 
well being of humanity ; that he would grant unto our 
rulers wisdom to adopt such measures as would speedily 
bring peace and prosperity to our distracted country. 

"If by the Government you mean the measures of 
the Administration, I must say that I do not pray for the 
success of the President's Proclamation liberating the 
slaves of the South. 

"Since these troubles began, I have claimed to be, 
and I believe I am, as loyal a man as there is in the 
country, and the Constitution does not permit you, nor 
any body of men, to prescribe a form of prayer as a test 
of my loyalty. Since the commencement of these 
troubles I have been a man of peace. I believed that 
war would be disastrous to the country, and that if per- 
severed in it would tear down the fair fabric which my 
fathers helped to rear, and that my children would be 
left without a country. 

" Sir, I boast not of family, but an ancestral name 
stands on the Declaration of Independence, and the 


family has represented the Government at Paris and at 
London. Sir, I can pray for peace, but I can not pray 
for war. I never in public or in private prayed for the 
success of the sword as wielded by any power on earth. 

" What was my offense ? I labored to preserve the 
peace of my congregation. I thought that the Church 
was not the proper arena for the strife of those contend- 
ing opinions that were convulsing the nation. 

"Why did not Colhoun and Lyon of the Presbyterian 
Church offer such prayers as that offered by W. C. Toole ? 
I will answer. They had too high a sense of religious 
propriety. Sir, political preaching has sown the seeds 
that are bringing forth the death of the nation. In more 
than twenty years in the ministry I have never given 
utterance to a political sentiment in the pulpit. But 
now these j)olitical preachers are heroes, and I am with- 
out a pulpit. 

"You have, also, published to the world that I have 
no claim upon the Government for protection. Thus I 
am published by you as an outlaw, to be slain by any 
one who may be so disposed. And this, notwithstand- 
ing I have constantly performed every duty enjoined 
upon me by the Constitution and laws of the country. 

"On last Wednesday evening, just at dark, my son 
William, while feeding, was shot at by some one who 
had secreted himself but a few yards from him. The 
bullet entered his cap just over his forehead and passed 
out behind. An inch lower would have killed him. 
The shot was, no doubt, intended for me. 

"When I wrote to you before, I did it that you might 
make your own record in my case. You had the oppor- 
tunity of revoking Gen. Loan's order or of sustaining 


it. You saw proper to exceed very much the order of 
Gen. Loan. 

" One word more. I had a financial interest of $1200 
a year in my pulpit so long as my pastoral relation to 
the Church should continue. That relation still con- 
tinues, but my financial interest in the pulpit has been 
confiscated, without the authority of law and contrary 
to a general order issued by the General commanding 
the department. I am advised by eminent legal counsel 
that yourself and General Loan are financially respon- 
sible to me. 

" General, I have thus written to you candidly, as I 

think a man of conscious integrity has a right to write 

to one to whom he is willing to accord equal integrity. 

If you think that order should still remain in force, so let 

it be. 

"Your obedient servant, 

"TV. M. Bush." 

To this letter General Hall made the following reply : 

u Headq'rs Seventh Military Dis't of Mo., | 
St. Joseph, Mo., May 2, 1863. j 

"Rev. Win. Rush, Chillicothe, Mo. : 

"Sir — I return herewith your very extraordinary 
letter of the 30th nit. Notwithstanding the threats 
contained in it against myself, you surely did not con- 
sider what you were writing. My opinion was, and is, 
that it would do a serious injury to the public for me 
to rescind Gen. Loan's order with reference to yourself. 
To threaten an officer for the discharge of his duties, 
especially in times like these, is a serious offense, which 
a Military Commission would promptly punish. I bear 
you no malice. I have done what I have done in your 


case because I believed my duty required it. My ad- 
vice to you is, to make no more threats. 
" Yery respectfully, 

"Willard P. Hall, 

« Brig.-Gen'l, E. M. M." 

Neither explanation nor comment is necessary to the 
full meaning of this instance of heartless cruelty and 
wanton oppression. The fact that General Hall's 
mother-in-law, with whom he lived, was at the time one 
of the most devoted, pious and prominent members of 
Mr. Eush's Church, only shades the deeper and darker 
the character of this Missouri Nero. 

General Hall's skepticism and political ambition made 
him a ready and a cruel instrument of religious persecu- 
tion. Without the moral courage to avow his skepti- 
cism, and denied the force of character necessary to 
meet and master opposition, he was just the man to use 
the authority of shoulder-straps to make war upon the 
institutions of heaven and persecute God's chosen 
ministers of salvation ; and he will feel very uncomfort- 
able in the history he has made. 

Mr. Eush found it necessary for his own safety to re- 
move his family to St. Louis, and remain there until 
the close of the war. He found the Mound Church 
without a pastor, and by the appointment of the Presid- 
ing Elder took charge of that Church, and there re- 
mained until the quiet and safety that succeeded the 
war was restored to the State. Mr. Eush will appear 
again as a victim of the New Constitution, and a noble 
champion of the liberty of conscience and the supremacy 
of Christ in his Church, which the infidel provisions of 
that instrument endeavored to strike down. 


It will be appropriate to close this chapter with an 
account of the murder of the 

Eev. Nathaniel Wollard, 

A minister of the Calvinistic, or, as generally termed, 
"Hard-Shell" Baptist Church. 

Elder Wollard, or "Uncle Natty/' as he was famil- 
iarly called, was an aged man, in his seventy-second year. 
He had lived a long time in Dallas county, Mo., where 
he was extensively known and very highly appreciated 
as a true man, a good neighbor, a kind father, an affec- 
tionate husband, a peaceable citizen and an acceptable 
minister — highly esteemed in love by his denomination 
for his character and work. He could not, nor did he 
desire to, take any part in the strifes, excitements and 
dangers of the war. He craved the boon of living at 
home unmolested, and spending the evening of his life 
in peace in the bosom of his family. 

He had grown uj) in the olden times, and under the 
old regime, when men were outspoken, candid and fear- 
less in the utterance of their sentiments ; and, hence, he 
expressed himself in opposition to the " abolitionists," 
as he called the Union men, and in sympathy with the 
South. He did not make himself officious or offensive 
in the expression of his Southern sympathies. He was 
not a secessionist per se, but a Southern man, deeply im- 
pressed with the conviction that the Northern fanatics 
intended to break up the Government and destroy the 
foundations of republican liberty. He honestly believed 
that the success of the South in the struggle would vin- 
dicate the wisdom of the fathers of the Bepublic, and 
establish firmly and forever the vital principles of civil 


and religious liberty for which " Washington fought and 
freemen died." 

The fact that he entertained such sentiments, how- 
ever prudent and cautious in their utterance, "was 
sufficient to call forth the vengeful feelings and murder- 
ous purposes of the militia of this State." 

A detailed account of his murder has been furnished 
by one acquainted with all the facts, in the following 
language : 

" The murder was committed on the evening of Sept. 
1, 1863 — that dark and bloody year. A cheerful fire 
had been made in his sitting room, and he was peace- 
fully enjoying an evening with his family, all unconscious 
of the approach of danger — not dreaming that his peace 
would so soon be disturbed, or that his long life was so 
near its end. While thus in domestic tranquillity, and 
unconscious of danger, a squad of militia scouts rode up 
to the door, dismounted and walked in without any 
ceremony. They addressed the old man in a very 
rough manner, ordering him out of his house, as they 
wished to speak with him. Father Wollard told them 
that they could talk to him where he was ; that he was 
not going to leave his house. 

"The intention of the militia was evidently to get him 
out of his house, feign that he made an effort to escape, 
and shoot him. If this was their intention they were 
defeated by the fact that Father Wollard supposed that 
if he left the house, one or two men would guard him 
and his family while the rest of them would pillage and 
then burn the house. 

"When they found that they could not get him out 
of the house, one of the militia raised his pistol and shot 


him, the ball taking effect in the face and inflicting a 
mortal wound. He was removed from the house into 
the yard and laid on a bed prepared for him, his head 
resting on the bosom of his heart-broken companion, 
while his son, a youth of sixteen, was wiping the blood 
from his face, and keeping it from his mouth, as it flowed 
so freely from the wound that he feared it would 
strangle his father. In the meantime the militia had 
set the house on fire and committed everything they 
had to the flames. 

"Having finished their work of destruction, one of 
them came to where the dying old man was lying, and, 
finding that he was not yet dead, shot him again, the 
ball taking effect in his forehead. He instantly expired. 

u The only charge they made against him was that 
he fed 'bush-whackers/ which was not true. He had 
fed Southern and Federal soldiers alike when they came 
to his house, and some of these very men had been 
recently fed at his table who now turned uj>on him and 
brutally and barbarously murdered him. 

ic The men who committed this fatal and foul deed 
belonged to Capt. Morgan Kelly's company of militia. 
They were never punished, but are now living in Dallas 
county undisturbed, except by an accusing conscience. 
Capt. Kelly himself professes to be a minister of the 
gospel, of the Christian, or Campbellite, Church, yet he 
seems to live in peace, with this and many other crimes 
staring him in the face." 

The heart sickens at such a recital of cold-blooded 
murder; and the evidence of savage, not to say in- 
human, barbarity that characterized the horrible crime 
is sufficient to humiliate the whole race of men and 


send our much vaunted Christian civilization reeling 
back into the dark ages. The shadow on the dial of 
Ahaz went back ten degrees — it was a wonderful mir- 
acle — but here, in the noon of the nineteenth century, 
the shadow on the dial of human progress and Christian 
civilization has gone down forty degrees without a 
miracle, and reaches the grosser, the darker and the 
baser passions of our fallen nature, which instigate and 
then execute deeds of horror at which all Christendom 




His Character and Position as a Minister — Order of Banishment — 
Interview with General Merrill — Note to Colonel Kettle — Cause 
of Banishment — Letter to A. C. Stewart — Provost-Marshal at 
Danville — Frank, Manly Reply — Second Letter to Mr. Stewart, 
and Petition to General McKean — The Latter Treated with Silent 
Contempt — Strong Loyal Petition Endorsed "by H. S. Lsine, IT. S. 
Senator, and 0. P. Morton, Governor of Indiana — "Red Tape" — 
Petition Returned — Hon. S. C. Wilson Counsel for the Exiles — 
General Schofield Finally and Unconditionally Revokes the Order 
of Banishment — Indictment for Preaching Without Taking the 
"Test Oath."— Why he Declined to Take the Oath— Prayer for 
his Persecutors. 

Eev. B. H. Spencer. 

Neither goodness, kindness, humility nor usefulness 
in a minister of the gospel could disarm malice or shield 
the servant of God from the persecutions of wicked men. 
It is truly astonishing how many and how diverse the 
pretexts framed for the arrest, robbery, banishment, 
imprisonment or murder of those whose only crime was 
that they were ministers of the gospel in connection 
with the M. E. Church, South. Infidelity was never at 
a loss for expedients and Antichrist was never without 
efficient agents. 

The Eev. B. H. Spencer is almost a native of Missouri, 
being only six months of age when his parents came to 
Missouri from North Carolina, and has received regular 
appointments from the Missouri Annual Conference, 


M. E. Church, South, consecutively since 1843, when he 
was first admitted on trial. No man has a cleaner and 
purer record in the Church, both in his personal and 
ministerial character; and few men have occupied so 
many places of high trust and responsibility. He is 
one of the old Presiding Elders, and has often been 
called to represent his Conference on the floor of the 
General Conference, and has always proved himself to 
be prudent in council, wise in legislation, correct in ad- 
ministration and eminently useful in the pulpit; distin- 
guished, perhaps, for his scriptural, practical and forcible 
expositions of the distinctive doctrines and duties of 
Bible Christianity. He is zealous, humble, earnest, ener- 
getic and Methodistic in all his ministerial work; exten- 
sively known and highly esteemed in love for his works' 
sake all over the State. 

Long associated with the honored names that will live 
in the annals of Missouri Methodism, and taking a high 
rank with them, the sentiments that introduced the 
Eev. W. M. Bush to these pages, and the reader, may, 
with but little alteration, introduce Mr. Spencer. 

Mr. Spencer is a representative man in his character 
and position in Missouri, and while his persecutions 
were severe and protracted, his was not an isolated case. 
He represents in his cruel and wanton exile a large class 
of Missourians, and especially of Missouri ministers, some 
of whom will, perhaps, never return to this State. B. 
T. Kavanaugh, L. M. Lewis, E. K. Miller, B. E. Baxter 
and many others are possibly lost to the State forever. 
They may have gone out for different causes, but the 
peculiar proscription and persecutions to which minis- 
ters in Missouri have been subjected kept them out. 


Few if any cases of persecution in Missouri present 
more deliberate meditation, cooler cruelty and more 
heartless inhumanity than the one disclosed in the fol- 
lowing narrative, made in Mr. Spencer's own quiet, 
clear and forcible style. His letters to the various mili- 
tary officials, written in exile, and while all the finer 
sentiments and feelings of his manly, Christian heart 
were writhing under the cruel injustice he had to bear 
without the means of vindication or the hope of redress, 
are worthy the pen of Cranmer, and would have given 
a higher tone and temper to the moral courage of 

The reader must, however, measure the man and his 
persecutors by the following paper : 

u Order of Banishment. 

"Dear Doctor : The first item that I send you is in 
regard to my banishment, as an act of ecclesiastical perse- 

11 In the town of High Hill, Mo., on the 16th January, 
1863, I received from the hands of a Federal soldier the 
following order, viz. : 

" ( Headquarters "N. E. District Missouri, } 
" < Warrenton, Mo., Jan. 13, 1863. j 

" 'Provost-Marshal, or Commanding Officer, Danville, Mo. : 
11 ' Sir : You will cause the following persons to leave 
the State of Missouri, within a reasonable time after the 
receipt of this order, and reside, during the war or until 
permitted to return, at some place north of Indianapolis, 
Indiana, and east of Illinois. They will be required to 
report to you, by letter, once a month, and are not per- 
mitted to leave the State by way of St. Louis, but 


directed to go by Macon City and Hannibal, Missouri. 
Rev. B. H. Spencer, ****** * # 

"'By command of Brigadier-General Merrill. 

" < Geo. M. Houston, A. A. G.' 

" The above order was accompanied by the following : 

"'Headquarters 67th Begiment E. M. M., ") 
'"Danville, Mo., Jan. 16, 1863. ) 

" ' Rev. B. H. Spencer : 

" ' Sir : The above is a true cop}' of Gen. Merrill's 
order to me. You will obey said order within six days 
from this date. You will report to these headquarters 
on the day of departure. 

"'By order of J. G. Kettle, Col. Commanding. 

"'J. F. Anderson, Adjutant.' 
" On the day of receiving this order I went to War- 
renton, being Gen. Merrill's headquarters, to see if I 
could not induce him to revoke it. I found him at the 
supper table, and unwilling to give me a hearing any- 
where else, when the following conversation took place 
between us : 

" ' Gen. Merrill, I have received from you an order of 
banishment from the State, and wish to see you in re- 
gard to it.' 

" ' Then what is your name and place of residence ?' 
"'My name is B. H. Spencer, High Hill, Mo.' 
"General (in a passion) — 'I can do nothing for you!' 
"I replied — 'It seems that the tongue of slander has 
reached you concerning me \ will you hear evidence in 
my favor V 

" His reply was peremptorily, ' No, sir ! ' 

"I inquired, 'Will you then read documents?' 

"Answer in same manner — c No t sir I' 


"He then inquired — 'Does the order allow you to go 
by St. Louis V 

"I answered, 'No, sir/ 

" ' Then/ said he, 'see that you don't go that way !' 

"I replied, 'I don't expect to.' 

"He said, "see that you don't!' And then added, 
'You may think yourself very fortunate that you are 
not hung, and should -feel that you are very mercifully 
dealt by ! ' 

So the conversation ended, and I returned home and 
wrote the following note to Colonel Kettle : 

" High Hill, Mo., Jan. 19, 1863. 
« ' Col. J. G. Kettle, Danville, Mo. : 

" 'Honored Sir : Some time ago I promised to marry 
a couple in this vicinity on to-morrow night, and as it 
will not be in violation of Gen. Merrill's order, and will 
furnish me some means with which to carry out that 
order, will you permit me to do so ? 

" 'I am, very respectfully, B. H. Spencer.' 

" The following is his reply : 

" ' Headquarters 67th Regiment E. M.M., | 
"'Danville, Mo., Jan. 19, 1863. j 

" ' Bev. B. H. Spencer : 

" ' Sir : Your request to marry the couple and to 

preach is granted. I would say that you had better not 

speak of your banishment in your sermon. 

"'Yours, &c, J. G. Kettle,' Colonel/ 

"On the 25th of January, 1863, I preached the ser- 
mon alluded to; and then, in company with four others, 
made my report to military headquarters at Danville, 
Mo. But, in consequence of an accident on the railroad, 


I was permitted to remain with my family until the 
28th of that month, when, with a sad heart, I was com- 
pelled to leave my distressed wife and six little children 
and go into a land of strangers, and remain in exile for 
ten long months. 

"Dr. H. TV. Pitman, Eev. D. TV. Nowlin, Eev. J. D. 
Gregory and Eev. TVm. A. Taylor were banished in com- 
pany with me. TVe had no trial, either civil or military, 
nor would they condescend to tell ns what were the 
charges against us, or whether, indeed, there were any. 
Nor to this day — September 7th, 1869 — have we found 
out why it was done, except through private and un- 
official sources. The information thus received as to 
the cause of my banishment was as I expected — Iicas 
banished because I was a Southern Methodist preacher! 
One of the officers was asked by one of my friends : 

I TVhat are the charges against Spencer V He answered, 

I I never heard that there are any ; but he is a man of influ- 
ence, and, if disposed, can do a great deal of harm !' An- 
other officer was asked by another friend, and he re- 
plied, ' The fact that he is a Southern Methodist preacher 
is all I want to know V There never was a more clear 
case of ecclesiastical persecution than was my banish- 
ment. Certain men sought to produce secession, treason 
and rebellion in the M. E. Church, South, by way of 
showing how they professed to hate these things in the 
nation; I opposed them, and the}^ became my enemies 
and had me banished. If any one doubts this let him 
attend to the following documents : 

"< Asiiby's Mills, Ind., April 22, 1863. 
"'Mr. A. C. Stewart, Provost- Marshal, Danville, Mo. : 
l< ' Sir — There are reasons which induce me to believe 


that my case is wholly at the disj)osal of the officers and 
Union men of Danville and vicinity. If this be so, I 
wish to solicit your attention to a few considerations in 
regard to my case. And, first, I was banished from my 
home and family without a trial or a knowledge of the 
charges against me y or who preferred them. Now, sir, 
is this right ? Is there any law, civil or militaiy, that 
will punish an innocent man ? How could the officer 
who banished me know that I was guilty of any crime 
without giving me a trial and hearing evidence in the 
case ? Have I ever had such a trial ? When ? Where ? 
Who were the judge, jury, witnesses pro and con t 
Where was the prisoner during the trial ? And where 
was my legal counsel to see that justice was done me? 
With what was I charged, and who were my accusers ? 
Three months have j>assed since my banishment, and I 
am still left in ignorance of why it was done. Was it 
done merely to gratify official ambition ? or rather, was 
it not done to gratify the malice of secret enemies ? Can 
the interests of the Government be secured or protected 
or its dignity increased by such treatment of one of its 
citizens ? Bo you say that I am a great rebel, and 
therefore such treatment is good enough for me ? How 
do you know that I am a rebel at all, much less a great 
one ? Did you learn it from mere rumor, or from a 
trustworthy witness, sworn to tell the truth before a 
proper tribunal and in the presence of the accused ? In 
the absence of such evidence how can an intelligent 
gentleman make such a charge, if, indeed, any one does 
make it ? If it be stated, or insinuated, that I have been, 
or am, disloyal or disobedient to the Constitution of the 
United States, or to any of the laws made in pursuance 


thereof, or to the constitution and laws of any State 
where I have ever lived, or to any military order or 
edict — this most unjust and oppressive one banishing me 
from my home and family not excepted — I deny the allega- 
tion and defy proof by competent testimony I Have I not 
silently borne injustice and oppression long enough? 
Can you blame me for entering my earnest protest 
against such treatment ? Has it not been said by offi- 
cers who ought to know, ( that there are no charges 
against me, but that I am a man of influence, and, if dis- 
posed, could do a great deal of harm f Now, if there are 
no charges against me, in the name of everything that 
an American citizen holds dear, why suffer me to be thus 
persecuted and oppressed without an effort to prevent 
it ? Are you not a sworn officer — sworn to support and 
defend the Constitution of the United States? and does 
that Constitution allow such treatment of an American 
citizen against whom there are no charges ? and can you 
allow it to be done without an effort to prevent it and 
be innocent? And suppose I have influence, is that a 
crime ? and what reason has any one to fear that I would 
use it for evil ? Is it proposed to banish men of character 
and influence from the State for fear they will exert their 
influence for evil ? If not, why send off, and keep off, 
so humble a person as myself? Is this the way an offi- 
cer should fulfill his oath of office? Was he clothed 
with authority for this purpose ? Is this the only pro- 
tection I am to expect from the officers of my native 
State ? Is not my banishment, under the circumstances, 
an unmitigated outrage upon civil and military order, 
as well as upon my liberties as a citizen ? I love and 
almost venerate the Government of the United States as 


established Dy our patriotic ancestors ! Among earthly 
institutions I expect and want nothing better. With it I 
find no fault. My complaint is against certain of its officers 
for the injustice and oppression with which they treat me. 
If you were in my place and I in your's, what course 
would you wish me to pursue ? If a peaceable and quiet 
citizen, such as I have always been, is not free from im- 
prisonment or banishment, who is safe ? Has justice for- 
saken the land? And is there no place where the op- 
pressed may find redress ? If there be any place where 
justice may be had, will you tell me where it is, and 
how to approach it ? I must candidly believe that my 
banishment was caused by ecclesiastical persecution — that 
I am banished for an ecclesiastical and not for a political 
reason ! Certain persons sought to produce secession, 
treason and rebellion in the M. E. Church, South, by 
way of showing how they professed to hate these things 
in the nation, and I opposed them, because I not only 
loved union in the nation, but also in the Church — hence 
they became my enemies, and for this cause alone, as I 
believe, they secured my banishment ! I believe the 
officer who did it was deceived, and induced to believe 
me a bad and dangerous man, or surely he would not 
have acted so hastily and rashly ! But you know, and 
so do all nry enemies, that such is not my character. 
Who would be injured by my return to my family? 
Can anybody tell ? Does anybody fear it ? Shall my 
secret enemies be allowed to continue the gratification 
of their malignity at my expense under jn*etense of 
friendship to the Government? Will my continued 
religious persecution do the G-overnment any good? 
Why, then, suffer its continuance ? Why keep a man in 


exile without just cause, who is in feeble health, with 
limited means, and a wife and six dependent children 
needing his attention ? Will you not then allow me to come 
home at once ? Do not even the instincts of humanity, 
to say nothing of the higher obligations of justice and 
official duty, urge compliance with this request? I 
honestly believe that you and the Union men of your 
vicinity can get mo home if you will — just as easily as 
to say the word. I may be mistaken, but I honestly 
believe that my whole case is in your hands, and that I 
remain in exile or return to my family, just as you will 
the one or the other. I have reasons for this opinion, 
and if I am mistaken would like to know it. I wish to 
say that in all that I have written I have not intention- 
ally used a single word that w T as disrespectful toward 
those in authority. In all that I have said, I have aimed 
to speak plainly, candidly and earnestly, but also respect- 
fully. I respect you on account of the authority with 
which you are invested and the Government which you 
represent. But I protest against the way I am treated, 
and who can blame me for it ? And if this protest shall 
be disregarded now, perhaps it may live and speak in 
vindication of my character when I am dead, and when 
the voice of injured justice shall be heard and respected. 
If you can not release me, will you tell me who can? 
And will you answer this at your earliest possible con- 
venience, and let me know what you intend to do in 
my case. I am, most respectfully, 

"<B. H. Spencer/ 
" The answer of the Provost-Marshal was prompt, frank 
and manly, and does honor to the head and heart of its 

author. Unlike every other officer, civil or military, to 


whom I had applied for information or redress, he did 
not treat me with silent contempt. He answered. And 
the answer is important, because it shows clearly that 
he not only had no hand in the banishment of myself and 
my companions in exile, but that he also had been kept 
in ignorance of the intention to do it, as also for the 
reasons why it was clone. Surely there could have 
been no public charges against us, or proper trial in our 
case, or the Provost-Marshal in our immediate vicinity 
could not have thus been kej^t in ignorance of such an 
intention till after it was done. 

"It proves, furthermore, that by order of Gen. Mc- 
Kean, it was left to the so-called loyal men of Mont- 
gomery county, Mo., to say whether we should return 
or not. And we have the names of those who gave 
their sworn opinions as to whether it was proper for us 
to return or not, and could give them, but in mercy we 
withhold them. And, finally, it proves that our efforts 
to obtain a revocation of our order of banishment, to 
be successful, had to be kept to ourselves. "Why? Sim- 
ply because if our secret enemies found it out they 
would thwart our efforts at the headquarters of the 
Commanding General of the district. But the letter 
speaks for itself. It is as follows : 

" { Office Provost-Marshal, Danville, } 
Montgomery Co., Mo., April 26, 1863. j 

" 'Bev. B. H. Spencer, Ashby's Mills, Ind. : 

" ' Dear Sir — I have just received yours of 22d inst., 
and must acknowledge I am utterly at a loss to com- 
prehend it. 

" ' I want to say, once for all, to yourself, as also to 
Doct. Pitman and Judge Nowlin, that I had no hand in 


your banishment whatever, either as a private citizen 
or as an officer; that I never had, either directly or in- 
directly, an intimation that such a thing was contem- 
plated. An order was issued by General McKean, who 
is Commanding General of this district, headquarters at 
Palmyra, to J. G. Lane, Provost-Marshal of "Wellsville 
district, to take the testimony of the loyal men of Mont- 
gomery county in relation to the propriety of your re- 
turn home. Lane was removed from office and his 
district thrown into mine, and the order was sent to me 
by General McKean, which I executed by taking the 
evidence of loyal men, both at High Hill and Mont- 
gomery City, as well as Danville. The evidence was 
sworn to and sent by order of the commanding General 
to his headquarters. 

" l Now, sir, I have given you the facts in regard to 
everything I have had to do with this case. And, al- 
though you protest against any intention to insult or 
offend in your communication, I must frankly admit 
that the whole tenor of your letter seems to savor of 
both. 'How can 'you consent, without just cause, to 
keep one in exile who is in feeble health/ &c, is one 
extract from your letter. 'Will you not then allow me to 
come home at once? is another. JSTow, sir, you must 
know that I have no direct control of this matter ! Why 
ask me such questions ? "Why not ask me, as a private 
citizen, to use my influence to obtain a revocation of the 
order ? The authorities that issued the order of your 
banishment have never asked, neither have I given, my 
opinion as to the propriety of the order. Notwithstand- 
ing I consider your letter as invidious, and, as I under- 
stand it ; full of insinuations against me, yet, under the 


circnmstances ; I will allow humanity to step in, discard 
all feeling that your letter may have excited, and give 
you the best advice I am capable of. 

"'Judge Nowlin, Doct. Pitman and yourself get up a 
letter, directed to Brig.-Gen. McKean, Palmyra, Mo., 
through me as Provost-Marshal of Montgomery county. 
Take humanity for your text; appeal to him through 
the tears of your wife and helpless children ; let Govern- 
ment officers alone ; agree to report to me once a week 
in person, if it should be considered necessary; give 
every assurance that your lips will be sealed in future 
as to the utterance of treason, directly or indirectly ; 
send the letter to me and I will forward it, with such 
recommendation as I may deem proper and right, and, 
if that fails, I am at the end of my row. The success 
of this thing will very much depend on keeping my ad- 
vice to yourselves. I may be mistaken, but I believe 
your liberation may be effected in that way. Give my 
respects to Judge Nowlin and Doctor Pitman. 
"'Yours, &c, 

"'A. G. Stewart, Prov.-Marsbal.' 

" To the above noble letter I made the following reply? 

" ' Ashby's Mills, Montgomery Co., Indiana, ") 

"'May 4, 1863. j 

" ' Mr. A. C. Stewart, Provost- Marshal, Danville, Mo. : 

" 'Dear Sir : Yours of the 26th April is to hand, has 
been read and contents noted. And in reply let me say, 
I regret that you considered my letter m its whole tenor 
' invidious, offensive and insulting/ notwithstanding my 
protest against such a construction. I knew the task I 
had undertaken was difficult, for there seems to be 


something about official position which is always more or 
less impatient of contradiction. And hence it was reason- 
able to conclude that this m true of military officers, who 
feel that it is theirs to command and for others to obey or 
submit, and not to reason or question. The difficulty was 
to so employ language as to convey some idea of my 
righteous indignation at the injustice of my treatment, and 
which would at the same time be respectful and courteous 
toward those in authority. And I question very much 
whether you yourself, in my circumstances, would, if 
you could, have done better. I was, with only a few 
days' notice, forced away from the fellowship and pas- 
toral oversight of hundreds of beloved brethren ; from 
•a most dependent and afflicted family ; from my only 
means of their support; from the graves of my kindred, 
and every thing of earth that was dear ; was denied the 
privilege of going by St. Louis, where I might have 
reached the ears of power and have gained a revocation, 
of my order of banishment; with limited means, was 
compelled to travel a circuitous and expensive route to 
my place of exile ; was denied the privilege of living in 
the loyal State of Illinois, where I had kindred, and it 
would have cost me nothing; was denied the sjmipathy 
of friends who would have helped me financially, but 
were afraid ; was sent into a land of strangers, under 
Government censure, where, without sympathy, if with- 
out money, a man had better be dead ; was not allowed 
to know the charges against me, who were my accusers, 
or even the semblance of a trial, though I had sought 
one of Gen. Merrill, of Gen. Curtis, of Gen. Halleck, of 
Gov. Gamble, of Attorney-General Bates, of Secretary 
Stanton and of President Lincoln, and had done this, 


directly and indirectly, through men of commanding in- 
fluence, whoso loyalty was above suspicion, and all this 
without success - } felt, yea knew, that I was innocent ; that 
there could be no truthful evidence of my being guilty 
of any crime ; knew that I was suffering all this to 
gratify the malignity of secret enemies who had deceived 
the military commander and secured my banishment; 
enemies who, like the midnight assassin, did their work 
and then slunk away to gloat over the misery they had 
caused ; felt satisfied that I was thus persecuted for an 
ecclesiastical and not for a political reason ; was sure the 
Government could not be benefited by my persecution 
nor injured by my return to my family ; and, finally, be- 
came thoroughly convinced that the influence that con- 
trolled the action of those who had the power to release 
me from the binding force of this order, or to keep me 
in exile, was in or near Danville ; and, in a word, was 
satisfied that I had found out the locality of the authors 
of my trouble and why they persecuted me, but the 
identical names of my persecutors I did not know; and 
hence, in view of the foregoing considerations, I wrote 
you in the way I did. Now, interpret my leter in the 
light of my circumstances, and imagine yourself in my 
condition, and you will be able to ' comprehend it/ and 
to excuse anything that may seem i discourteous or in- 
sulting/ especially when I assure you nothing of the 
kind was intended. You have my thanks for jour prompt 
and manly reply to my letter. There are times when I 
would rather a man would abuse me a little than not an- 
Sicer me at all, and this is one of those times. You are 
the only officer who had the condescension, kindness, 
humanity, or whatever else you may please to call it, to 


answer a single one of my numerous appeals for deliv- 
erance from oppression, or for instruction as to where 
or how I might obtain it. To your praise be this spoken. 
It affords me much pleasure, also, to learn from yourself 
that you had no hand in securing my banishment, or 
knowledge of it until after it occurred. I wish I could 
think the same of every other citizen of Danville. 

u ' And now that, in accordance with your wish, I am 
addressing you as a private citizen, may I ask, and con- 
fidently expect, that you will give me the names of my 
accusers, and the nature of their accusations against me, 
if there are any, together with the names of those 103'al 
men whose sworn testimony was sent to Gen. JMcKean 
in regard to the 'propriety' of allowing me to come 
home, and the substance of what each one said ? As tllat 
is the nearest a trial of anything else I have had, should 
not the accused be allowed to know his accusers, the names 
of the witnesses and the nature of their testimony against 
him ? You reprehend me very severely for insinuating 
that you have any ' direct control of my case/ Well, I 
did not suppose you had authority to revoke the order of 
banishment ; but I did suppose, and do still suppose, that 
you and your friends of that vicinity can influence Gen. 
McKean to revoke the order or not, just as you wish ; 
and that you have control of my case in that way. 
And hence it is that I am so thankful to you, and so 
much encouraged by your kind offer to use your influ- 
ence with the commanding officer to set aside this order 
and permit me to return home. And I am sure if you 
do promptly and vigorously exert your influence in that 
direction you arc certain of success. 

" l Among j^our items of advice you say, ' Give every 


assurance that your lips will be sealed in future as to 
the utterance of treason, directly or indirectly/ Now, 
as this is, to my mind, an intimation that some one, or 
all three of us, are charged with having been guilty of 
treasonable utterances, and hence are required to give 
assurance that we will do so no more, I wish to say for 
myself that, if such be the intimation, I deny the allega- 
tion in toto ; for I have neither uttered nor acted treason, 
nor do I expect to do either in future. And if I am 
permitted to return, and you can protect me from the 
tongue of slander, and the secret enemies that with con- 
summate mendacity hound my steps and torture and 
misrepresent my language and conduct, you will hear 
nothing of treason, either in utterance or action. But, 
if that can not be done — if the tongue of slander and 
falsehood against me can not be silenced in any other 
way — then give a fair trial, and make these secret liars, 
who whisper falsehoods into official ears against those 
they hate, 'face the music/ and I will vindicate my in- 
nocence. Upon that subject I can make no farther pro- 
mises. A mere charge of treason, you know, is no evidence 
of guilt. The immaculate Son of Man was accused of 
rebellion, sedition and treason, with blasphemy, and with 
being the agent of the prince of devils ! Of Innocence it- 
self they said, l He is not fit to live ; away with Mm ! crucify 
him ! crucify him !' And l If they have done these things 
in the green tree, what will they not do in the dry?' 
And the same divine authority has said, l If any man 
will live godly in Christ Jesus, he must suffer persecution/ 
and I have made my calculations accordingly. As to 
your other suggestions, I wish to say that I will here- 
with transmit to Gen. Mclvean, through you, a request, 


or petition, for the revocation of this order in my case, 
accompanied with a few of the reasons why I make it, 
which I will thank you to send to him, if you please, 
together with such remarks and recommendations as you 
may think proper to make. Please let me hear from 
you at an early day, and much oblige, 
" ' Most respectfully, 

«<B. II. Spencer/ 

"The petition was sent to General McKean, through 
the Provost-Marshal of Montgomery county, Mo., to- 
gether with the best appeal that he could make in our 
favor. But the only notice he seems to have given it 
was to treat it with silent contempt. 

" The following is a copy of that petition : 

"'Ashby's Mills, Ind., May 7, 1863. 
" 'Brigadier-Gen. McKean, Com., Palmyra, Mo. : 

" < Dear Sir — Will you please to revoke the order of 
Gen. Merrill, of the 13th January, 1863, banishing me 
from the State of Missouri ? A few of the reasons why 
I ask you to do this are — 

" ' 1st. The order ivas unjust. The General who issued 
this order did not know me, was dependent upon others 
for his information concerning me, and was evidently 
deceived by my personal enemies, or he never would have 
issued it. 

" ' 2d. I have never engaged in this rebellion in any 
way, nor violated any law, civil or military ; and, there- 
fore, am not deserving of this punishment. 

"'3d. I have a wife and six small, helpless children, 
whose ages range from two to twelve years, from whom 
I have been forcibly separated for more than three 


months j and who very much need my attention, and, 
therefore, humanity, to say nothing of the higher claims 
of truth and justice, demands compliance with this re- 

" <4th. If permitted to return, I expect to he, as Ihave 
ever been, a law-abiding and good citizen, and, therefore, 
the Government can not be benefited by my remaining 
in exile nor injured by my return to my family. 

" ' 5th. As it is the duty and glory of a Government 
to protect its citizens in the possession of all their legiti- 
mate rights, I ask, and hope it will be your pleasure to 
grant, that I may return to my family in the enjoyment 
of the untrammeled liberty that I had before my banish- 

" ' This petition will be sent to your headquarters by 
Mr. A. C. Stewart, Provost-Marshal, Danville, Mo., ac- 
companied by such remarks and recommendations as he 
may think proper to make. 

"'In the confident expectation that you will grant 
this just and reasonable request at an early day, 
"'1 am, most respectfully, 

"<B. H. Spencer.' 

" After being compelled to remain long enough in 
exile to form character and make friends amongst stran- 
gers, at the end of nine months some of the most promi- 
nent Union men of Indiana, on the 31st August, 1863, 
sent the following petition to the Provost-Marshal Gen- 
eral of the department of the Missouri : 
"< To Lieut.-Col. J. 0. Broadhead, P. M. G. of Missouri, 

St. Louis, Mo., or to whomsoever this petition should be 

addressed : 

"'The undersigned petitioners beg leave respectfully 


to represent to the proper authorities in the State of 
Missouri^ that we are citizens of the United States, resi- 
dents of the counties of Montgomery and Putnam, in 
the State of Indiana; that Ave are now and ever have 
been loyal and devoted to the Government of the United 
States ; that we are supporters of the present Adminis- 
tration thereof, and that we are in favor of using all 
lawful ways and means for suppressing the present re- 
bellion and preserving the Union established by our 
fathers ; we, therefore, cordially endorse all and every 
one of the measures of the Government having these 
much desired objects in view. 

" 'We beg leave further to represent that there have 
been residing in our midst, in our immediate vicinity, 
for the past six or seven months, three individuals, said 
to be citizens of Montgomery county, in the State of 
Missouri, and to have been banished from that State by 
the military authorities there, viz. : H. "W". Pitman, B. 
H. Spencer and David W. JSTowlin. "While we can not 
know the causes that led to the banishment of these 
men, we would state that they came among us un- 
der the ban of the Government, and we looked upon 
them as objects of suspicion. They and their conduct 
have been closely observed and narrowly scrutinized, 
not to say strictly watched by our party, and we deem 
it but sheer justice to declare, candidly and emphatically, 
that after an observation of the length of time indicated 
above we have seen nothing in these men that in our 
judgment would require that they longer be kept in 

"'They are represented to us as men having families 
dependent greatly on them for support, and every feel- 


ing of humanity is enlisted in their behalf, if the inter- 
ests of the Government do not imperatively require 
their continuance in exile. With the lights before us, 
and in view of the facts that these men have resided for 
the past six or seven months in a population greatly 
excited on political issues, and among whom sundry dis- 
loyal practices have been rife, in which they have had 
ample opportunities to have partaken if they had been 
so inclined, and yet our observation has not been suffi- 
cient to detect them as aiders or abettors in these 
disloyal practices; we feel free, therefore, to declare 
emphatically our convictions that the interests of the 
Government will not be advanced by a longer continu- 
ance of their exile ; but, on the contrary, we are satisfied 
that those interests would be promoted by a revocation 
of the order banishing them from Missouri. \Ye, there- 
fore, in behalf of these exiles, pray the authorities in 
Missouri who are empowered to do so to revoke the 
order banishing the said H. W. Pitman, B. H. Spencer 
and David W. Nowlin from the said State of Missouri, 
and to release them from further pains and penalties 
in the premises; and as loyal citizens in duty bound, 
we will ever pray, &c. 

(Signed) "'John W. Harrison, 

" < Dr. H. Labarre, 
"'Franklin M. McMurray, 
"'Dr. George TV. Miller, 
"'James Knox, 


"The undoubted loyalty of these petitioners, and 
their prominence in social and political circles during 


Mr. Lincoln's Administration, received the following 
endorsement, which accompanied their petition and 
formed a part of it : 

11 1 1 have known the signers of this paper long and 
well; they are true and loyal citizens of Indiana, and 
are all supporters of the Administration. They are 
gentlemen of the highest character, and their statements 
are entitled to full credit. 

"<H. S. Lane, U. S. Senator/ ' 

" r The gentlemen who signed the foregoing statement 
are of undoubted loyalty, and their representations are 
worthy of credit. 

" l O. P. Morton, Gov. of Indiana.' 

" And now, by way of showing how difficult it was for 
those in prison or exile to obtain a hearing at headquar- 
ters, in consequence of official routine, etiquette, or what 
is technically called ' Bed Tape/ I give the following 
inscription, which was written on the outside of the 
above petition before it was returned to the petitioners. 
It seems first to have come into the hands of some sub- 
official, who read it and then wrote on it a digest of its 
contents, as follows : 

(<( Petition. Citizens of Indiana. P. 102 (P. M. G.) 63. 
That II. VT. Pitman, B. H. Spencer and D. ^Y. Nowlin, 
exiles from Montgomery county, Mo., be permitted to 
return to their families and homes, as they have been 
closely watched while here and have always conducted 
themselves as Union men. These petitioners are in- 
dorsed by the Governor of Indiana.' 

"This sub-official then seems to have sent it to the 
P. M. General of the Department, who, without grant- 
ing or promising to grant the petition, sent it back to 


Gov. Morton, with the following explanation written 

on it : 

(Ct Headquarters Department of the Missouri,") 

" ' Office of the P. M. G., [■ 

" < St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 3, 1863. ) 

" ( Respectfully returned to his Excellency, 0. P. 
Morton, Governor of Indiana, with the information that 
there are no papers on the cases of the persons named 
in the within petition in this office. [Neither does their 
names appear upon the records. They were probably 
banished by order of some district commander. 

" ' By order of Lieut. -Col. J. O. Broadhead. 

" < H. H. Haine, 
" < Lieut, and A. P. M. G. Dept. of the Missouri.' 

"Upon receiving it Governor Morton sent it to Sen- 
ator Lane, who sent it to the petitioners with the follow- 
ing explanation : 

" ' This paper was to-day returned to me by Governor 
Morton, with the indorsements on it. Sept. 7, 1863. 

"<H. S. Lane/ 

" Just think of it ! No trial, no charges, nothing for 
us or against us, not on the records, no papers in our 
cases, and yet we in exile and compelled to stay there ! 
But we employed one of Indiana's noblest lawyers, the 
Hon. Samuel C. Wilson, of Crawfordsville, to take that 
petition and go with it in person to Gen. Schofield's 
headquarters. The result was an unconditional revoca- 
tion of the order of banishment, on the 16th Sept., 1863, 
which is as follows : 

" 'Headq'rs Department of the Missouri, ") 
St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 15th, 1863. j 

«< Special Orders No. 252. ] 

"<I. Dr. H. W. Pitman, David Nowlin and B. H. 


Spencer, citizens of Montgomery county, Missouri, here- 
tofore banished to Indiana, to remain there during the 
war, are permitted to remain in any part of the United 
States, outside of the limits of this Department. They 
will report their places of residence the first of each 
month during the war to the Provost-Marshal General 
of this Department. 

"'By command of Major-General Schofield. 

"<Wm. W. Eno, Ass't Adj't-Geri'l. 

"<B. H. Spencer, per Maj. Dunn.^ 

"The foregoing facts and documents are a mere tith- 
ing of what might be given to the same effect, and go 
to show most clearly that I was persecuted in various 
ways, and banished from my helpless family for ten 
long months, for no higher and no other crime than that 
I was a Southern Methodist preacher I 

Test Oath. 

" The following is a mere sample of numerous other 
indictments against me for preaching without taking 
the Missouri test oath : 

"'Know all men, by these presents, that we, B. H. 
Spencer, as principal, and Thomas Kemble and A.Bige- 
low, as securities, are held and firmly bound unto the 
State of Missouri in the sum of one thousand dollars, 
the payment whereof, well and truly to be made, we 
bind ourselves, our heirs, administrators and executors, 
firmly by these presents. The conditions of the above 
bond are, that whereas B. H. Spencer has been indicted 
by the Grand Jury of Montgomery county for preaching 
without taking the oath ; Now, if the said B. H. Spencer 
shall personally appear before the Judge of our Circuit 


Court on the first clay of the next term of said Court, 
said term of said Court to be held at the court-house in 
the town of Danvi.le, in and for said county, on the 
fourth Monday of next May, and answer to said indict- 
ment, and not depart therefrom without the leave of 
said Court, then said bond to be void, otherwise to re- 
main in full force and effect. Witness our signatures 
this the 18th day of May, A. D. 1866. 

«<B. H. Spencer, 
" < Thomas Kemble, 
« tl( Abner Bigelow/ 

"My refusing to take this oath was not the result of 
an unwillingness to obey the constitution and laws of 
the State of Missouri, for I had already taken the i Con- 
vention oath/ the 'Halleck oath' and the 'Bosecrans 
oath/ and had sworn fealty to the State as often, and in 
as many ways as reason, conscience and loyalty would 
allow. And hence, when civil authority came between 
me and my Divine Master, and virtually said, I will al~ 
low you to obey your Master if you will swear fealty to me 
first, I believed it to be wicked thus to surrender the 
claims of Christ to the demands of Ca?sar, and resolved, 
at the hazard of fines and imprisonments, yea, even of 
life itself, that I would refuse compliance with this un- 
righteous requirement. I believed they had as much 
right to say what should be preached as to say ivho should 
preach it! Hence I refused, and numerous indictments 
were the result. 

u Having scarcely commenced the recital of my per- 
secutions as a Southern Methodist preacher, I find this 
article already too long, and therefore close, with the 
kindest wishes for all my persecutors, and an earnest 
prayer for their salvation. 

" I am, truly and fraternally, 

"B. H. Spencer." 




Rev. D. B. Cooper — Attempt Made to Ride him on a Rail — Defeated 
bv the Timely Appearance of Soldiers — Particulars Furnished by 
Dr. N. W. Harris— Rev. H. N. Watts— A Native of Missouri- 
Efforts Made to Place the Old Ministers under Disability or Run 
them out of the State — Mr. Watts Arrested — Silenced — Corre- 
spondence with Provost-Marshals Reid and Sanderson— ''Test 
Oath" — Rev. Thos. Olanville — An Englishman by Birth — Early 
Life — Peculiar Trials — Manner of Life as a Citizen and a Minister 
— Driven from Home in 1863 — Returns and Obtains Written Per- 
mission to Preach — Warned not to fill his Appointment on Sab- 
bath, September 20, 1863 — Remains at Home — That Night he is 
Shot Through his Window — Shot a Second and Third Time, and 
Expires Praying for his Murderers — His Eldest Son Shot and 
Killed the Same Night — Details Furnished by J. H. Ross and Rev. 
John Monroe — Conclusion. 

Eev. D. B. Cooper. 

The following account ol an attempt to mob and ride 
on a rail this humble and worthy minister of the gospel 
will be perused with interest, as it is furnished by an 
eye witness and an intelligent physician, whose state- 
ments will not be called in question. But for the fact 
that he is " not a profossor of Christianity/' and author- 
izes the use of his name with respectable references, the 
language would be somewhat toned down and tempered 
to a milder moral zone. But it is thought best to give 
the communication as received, as it details some import- 
ant facts, and throws light upon the animus of others : 
"Pilot Grove, Cooper Co., Mo., April 25, 1869. 
"Rev. P. M. Pinckard, St. Louis, Mo. : 

" In the summer of 1863 Eev. D. B. Cooper, now of 

Mt. Sterling, Ky., was on the circuit in Linn county, 



Mo. He is one of the purest men I have ever known, 
and rem irk ably reticent. I knew him intimately and 
well, being his physician and a personal friend. He 
never preached or talked polities, even to his most inti- 
mate friends and acquaintances. If there was but one 
man in Missouri during those wicked years of horror 
walking humbly before God and acting uprightly to- 
ward his fellow-men, that man was D. B. Cooper. 

"On Sunday he was preaching in Laclede, my then 
residence; some one whispered to me that some soldiers 
we- e outside intending to ride the preacher on a rail. 
I went out and sure enough there were some half-dozen 
soldiers who had come up from Brookfield, had gone 
into a 'loyal ' doggery, imbibed freely, and meeting 
some 'loyal Methodists/ were told that a rebel was 
preaching. Under the stimuli of bad whisky and the 
worse hearts of the 'God and morality' Methodists, they 
had come to the church with a fence-rail intending to 
commit an outrage upon this gentleman. But 'man 
proposes and God disposes/ 

"I tried to dissuade them from their purpose, but 
could not, and went back into church to a lieutenant of 
Gol. McFerran's regiment, then stationed in Laclede, 
and told him to go to Col. McFerran and tell him to send 
a file of soldiers immediately. I knew McFerran could 
be relied on, as he was a Democrat and a gentleman. 
There was no time to lose ; service was nearly over, and 
neither Mr. Cooper nor his congregation knew anj'thing 
of the impending outrage. The upper floor of a 'loyal* 
Methodist's house near by was full of 'God's elect* to 
witness the fun. Just before the service closed the 
braves crowded into the house, and when the congrega- 


tion was dismissed they, the soldiers, were so situated 
that they had to leave the house last. When they came 
out and were about to lift their rail at the side of the 
house and seize Mr. Cooper — who was yet in ignorance 
of their designs — they, and all but myself, were sur- 
prised to see two files of soldiers, with fixed bayonets, 
marching down on us so as to encompass the entire 
crowd. As no violence had been done, no arrests were 
made. The miserable tools of the bad-hearted fanatics 
slunk away like whipped curs, leaving their pious (?) 
instigators gnashing their teeth and calling down curses 
upon McFerran and myself. I don't think their prayers 
were ever answered. 

" These maudlin soldiers were not to blame. They 
were mere tools in the hands of the base-hearted men 
and women who instigated the outrage. This act is 
only a- type of the general conduct of this people during 
the war who are now whining for union with you. 

"I am no professor of Christianity, but if such people 
are Christians, or your union with them would compose 
a Christian body, I pray the Giver of all good to incline 
my heart to heathenism rather than such a mongrel 

u I was living in Boonville when they committed the 
theft of your church there, and know all about it; but 
you will get the particulars of that honest (?) act from 

"I have given you the facts, but have taken no pains, 
as you see. You may have to re-write it. You are at 
liberty to insert it in your book over my signature if 
you wish. 

« Your friend, N. W. Harris." 


References were furnished amply sufficient to endorse 
the veracity of Dr. Harris, had it needed such endorse- 

A complete history of those perilous times would un- 
veil many similar acts nipped in the bud, or plotted and 
projected, but defeated by the timely interference of 
good men. 

Many Southern Methodist preachers were threatened 
with a ride on a rail and a coat of tar and feathers; but 
the presence of peaceable citizens and the fear of mili- 
tary interference deterred the rabble in most cases from 
committing the deeds to which they were instigated. 

The Rev. B. R. Baxter, now in Montana, and the 
Rev. H. H. Hedgepeth, now in heaven, and others, were 
forced to leave their work in Andrew, Holt and adjoin- 
ing counties in consequence of such threats. Even the 
persons and lives of all Southern Methodist ministers 
were in constant peril in that portion of the State until 
after the Supreme Court of the United States had de- 
clared the test oath of the New Constitution unconsti- 
tutional. Indeed, not until 1867 was it safe for one of 
the proscribed and threatened of the M. E. Church, 
South, to be seen or heard in that part of the State 
northwest of St. Joseph, as facts hereafter to be nar- 
rated will show. 

But for the present, and for the sake of some little 
chronological order, events in Southeast Missouri claim 
attention ; and, first, 

Rev. Henry N. Watts. 

Why were native Missourians in the ministry marked 
as the special objects of displeasure? Were they sin- 
ners above all the men who lived and labored in this 


goodly State, that such exceptional notice should bo 
taken of them in the administration of pious loyalty ? 
Possibly the discrimination was made upon the ground 
of personal influence with the people. That they had 
more influence with the people and stood higher in 
public estimation than any imported men will not be 
questioned; but that their influence was used for evil 
purposes, either political, social or moral, is distinctly 
denied. That others were envious of their well-earned 
position, and jealous of their power over the people and 
consequent ability to control the moral forces of the 
State for ecclesiastical advancement and distinction, is 
too true to escape the notice of history ; for upon this 
fact the only rational hypothesis can rest that accounts 
for the noteworthy pre-eminence given to the old native 
Missouri ministers in these persecutions. A man who 
had been so long and so well known in the Missouri 
pulpit as the Rev. H. N". Watts could not escape the 
heavy hand of the persecutor, and the distinction in 
suffering he had gained in the ministry. 

Mr. Watts was admitted on trial in the Missouri Con- 
ference, M. E. Church, South, at St. Louis, in 1844, and 
appointed to Eipley Mission, Cape Girardeau District. 

From that time on he has been a faithful laborer in 
his Master's vineyard — always ready to go where the 
Bishop appointed him without murmuring or gainsay- 
ing. At times he has been called to fill the chair of 
Presiding Elder, and also to represent his Conference in 
the General Conference. His fidelity to the sacred 
claims and obligations of the gospel ministry has only 
been equaled by his loyalty to the Church of his choice 
and his fidelity to her distinctive peculiarities. He was 


always a man of one work, and never concerned him- 
self particularly about the civil and political affairs of 
the country. 

The policy of the Church and the saving principles 
and power of the gospel of grace were more to him 
than all " the things which belong unto Csesar." He 
thought that there were men enough to attend to 
Caesar's business, but none too many ministers to keep 
God's business with men and man's interest in the 
" kingdom of heaven " from suffering. Hence he kept 
himself free from political strifes and attended, with 
singleness of heart and life, to his holy calling. Thus 
he was engaged when the war broke out, and up to the 
summer of 1863 he had suffered very little molestation. 
He had taken no part in the strife and committed no 
act of treason against the Government ; was a peaceable, 
orderly citizen. 

In 1863 Mr. Watts was living in Charleston, Missis- 
sippi county, Mo., and on the 23d of July was arrested 
at his house by a squad of soldiers, accompanied by 
Meeker Thurman, Aaron W. and John Grigsby, and 
taken to Columbus, Ky. He was charged with no 
crime, and no offense against the laws or peace of the 
Government was ever alleged against him. In vain did 
he plead the protection of the Constitution of the 
United States. He was threatened with banishment or 
imprisonment during the war, unless he would take and 
subscribe a military oath, which was as repugnant to his 
feelings as it was oppressive to the rights of conscience. 
After taking the oath to secure his liberty, and receiving 
some personal abuse as a minister of the gospel, he was 
released and permitted to return to his home after an 
absence of several days. 


Iii the spring of 1864, and while Capt. Ewing's com- 
pany of militia were stationed in Charleston, and Lieut. 
Jas. A. Reed was Ass't Provost-Marshal, Mr. Watts was 
prohibited from preaching the gospel for several weeks 
by military authority. He continued, however, to travel 
his circuit and hold religious services. He would read 
the word of "God, sing, pray and exhort the people to 
"flee from the wrath to come" and " lead peaceable 
and quiet lives in all godliness and honesty." 

The following is the correspondence between the 

Assistant Provost-Marshal and Mr. Watts. It will serve 

to develop the nature of the persecutions he suffered in 

the light of the official records : 

" Office Assistant Provost-Marshal, | 
" Charleston, Mo., March 17, 1864. f 

" Parson Watts : 

" Sir : You will greatly oblige me, and at the same 
time not inconvenience yourself, perhaps, by calling at 
this office on or before the 19th inst., for the purpose of 
complying with ' Special Order No. 61/ issued by the 
Provost- Marshal General, St. Louis, Mo., March 7, 1864, 
requiring ministers of the gospel to take the oath of 
allegiance therein prescribed. 

"Your non-compliance with this notice will be taken 
as a refusal and will be acted upon accordingly. 

"James A. Eeid, 
" 1st Lieut, and Ass't Provost-Marshal." 

To which Mr. Watts returned the following reply: 
" Charleston, Mo., March 18, 1864. 
"Lieut. James A. Reid, Ass't Provost- Marsh a! : 

" Sir: Your note of the 17th inst. has been received, 
asking me to appear at your office on or before the 19th 


inst., to comply with 'Special Order No. 61/ concern- 
ing ' convocations, conferences, councils, assemblies/ &c. 

" 1. I have written to St. Louis for certain informa- 
tion on this and other subjects. I would greatly prefer 
getting said information before taking action in this 

" 2. I assure you I have not violated said order by 
attending any synod, council, conference, or any such 
assembly under any other name, since said order was 

" 3. And as you think preaching would be a violation 
of said order, I have ceased preaching since I have heard 
of this order. And a private citizen is not required to 
take that oath, yourself being judge. 

"4. As a private individual I have taken the oath of 
allegiance, a copy of which I have j and, 

"5. I have not at any time, and do not design viola- 
ting that order, and with this assurance I hope I shall 
not be hurried in this matter. 

"Kespectfully, H. "N. Watts." 

Mr. Watts addressed the following letter to the Pro- 
vost-Marshal General, St. Louis : 

"Charleston, Mo., March 18, 1864. 
"J. P. Sanderson, Pro. -Marshal Gen'l, St. Louis, Mo. : 

"Dear Sir — Special Order No. 61, from your office, 
dated the 7th inst., ' concerning religious convocations, 
synods, councils, conferences, or assemblies under any 
other name or title/ not being understood as to the ex- 
tent of its application, will you be kind enough to answer 
the following inquiries : 

"1. Under these terms, 'convocations, synods, &c, 
or assemblies under any other name or title/ does this 


include congregational worship, or a congregation met 
in open church, with free seats, for preaching and other 
public services ? and will each one so assembled be re- 
quired to take the oath prescribed in Special Order 
No. 61? 

"2. When an assembly of divines have met to trans- 
act the business of the Church, and have taken the pre- 
scribed oath, are they expected then to oppose secession 
and treason publicly from the pulpit, or only in private 
circles ? 

" 3. A minister who has within the past year taken 
the oath of allegiance in another State, but is now 
traveling in this State, must he again take the oath 
before he can meet his congregation for public worship ? 

"Answers to these inquiries will be gladly received, 
if you can find time to answer 

" Your obedient servant, 

"H. 1S T . Watts." 

The Assistant Provost-Marshal at Charleston received 

the following letter from the Provost-Marshal General 

in answer to the inquiries of Mr. Watts: 

"Headquarters Department of the Missouri, 
Office of Provost-Marshal General. 

St. Louis, Mo., March 24, 1864. 

"Sir — I am in receipt of your letter of the 21st, en- 
closing your correspondence with the Rev. Mr. Watts, 
and asking for further instructions; and, also, I am in 
receipt of a letter from the same Rev. gentleman, pro- 
pounding to me the following questions : 
(See questions above.) 

"It can not be necessary, either for your guidance or 
that of the Rev. gentleman who has propounded these 
questions to me, to answer them categorically. 


" The order referred to is too plain and distinct to be 
misunderstood. It applies, as the language used unmis- 
takably indicates, to conferences and all other repre- 
sentative assemblies convened to promote the cause of 
religion and morality, and not to the ordinary meetings 
of Christians assembled for the business purposes of a 
congregation, or benevolent society, or for the worship 
of God. All the objects of it are answered when its 
enforcement is confined to the assemblies indicated in it, 
and, as a matter of course, it forms no part of its pur- 
pose or requirements that persons should take the j>re- 
scribed oath before proceeding to worship their Maker 
when assembled for that purpose. 

" In case of the attendance at any assemblage of the 
character indicated in said order of any one who has 
already taken the oath of allegiance prescribed by the 
laws of this State for the clergy to legalize marriage, &c, 
any certificate or evidence of the fact will be sufficient 
to render him eligible without again taking the pre- 
scribed oath. 

"But, while such is the liberal construction of the 
Order No. 61, requiring no oath of those divines who 
have already taken the required oath to enable them to 
perform all their functions, it is no less the determina- 
■tion of the undersigned to enforce a rigid compliance 
with the ordinance of the State Convention of June 10, 
1S62, requiring licensed and ordained preachers of the 
gospel to take the oath of allegiance therein prescribed 
before assuming to discharge the duties pertaining to 
their avocations under the laws of this State, 

" Those who have failed to do so, and who, under the 
pretense of preaching or worshiping God, meet really 


for seditious purposes, and, in truth, to desecrate and 
violate the laws of God and their country, can not be 
allowed so to meet or carry on their seditious purposes, 
and will be held to a strict accountability. 

"I have no inclination, nor do I conceive it to beany 
part of my duty, to answer the Eev. gentleman's second 
interrogatory, and thus instruct him in his ministerial 
duties. My respect for his profession obliges me to 
presume that he is familiar with the Bible, and needs no 
such instruction from me. For the information asked 
in that interrogatory he will, therefore, have to refer to 
the Bible, whose expounder he professes to be. He 
need but do so in the proper spirit, and with an earnest 
desire to be guided by its teachings, to insure unto him 
a flood of light as to his duty in the premises. 

"You will furnish the Eev. Mr. AYatts with a copy of 
this letter, and be guided in your own actions by its in- 

" Eespectfully, J. P. Sanderson, 

"Pro v. -Mar. Gen'l. 
"Lt. Jas. A. Eeid, Ass't Pro -Mar'l, Charleston, Mo." 

The letter of the Provost-Marshal General was for- 
warded to Mr. "Watts, through the Assistant Provost- 
Marshal's office at Charleston, accompanied by an order 
from the latter office requiring him to take the Con- 
vention oath of '62, or cease to preach, and report him- 
self at headquarters, St. Louis. He went to St. Louis, 
took what was called the " Gamble oath," returned home 
&nd resumed his ministerial labors. 

The correspondence here given is specially valuable 
for the light it throws upon the spirit and bearing of 
the military authorities in the direct issue they made 


with the clergy of the State. Many ministers of the 
gospel were more oppressed and persecuted, but all of 
them did not so far yield to military authority on the 
one hand, nor so sharply contend for the rights of con- 
science on the other. 

The " Special Order, No. 61," has a history of itself 
that will be unveiled in due time, and the true nature 
of the proscription and persecution under it will be 
better disclosed in another place. 

This forcing the conscience of ministers by prescrib- 
ing " test oaths " is not a new thing. It is as old as the 
second great persecution under Domitian, A. D. 81, and 
as cruel as the Spanish Inquisition. 

When State Conventions and military commanders in 
Missouri prepared political "test oaths" for ministers 
of the gospel as a class, and ordered all non-juring 
ministers under disability, the object was not doubtful 
in the minds of those acquainted with the history of 
religious persecutions. 

Another martyred minister of the gospel, the horrible 
murder of another of God's chosen messengers of salva- 
tion, and scene first of the great Missouri tragedy closes, 
the curtain falls, and both writer and reader may seek 
temporary relief from what Dr. Summers, in a private 
note, calls "a terrible narrative." When the curtain 
rises again it will unveil other scenes in this wonderful 
histrionic drama, of which those already presented are 
but the preparation and prelude. 

The trials and persecutions of the faithful men of 
God already narrated are sufficient to present the moral 
and religious phases of the war in Missouri to an intelli- 
gent public. Would to God the pall of oblivion could 


settle down upon the whole history. But if the world 
still retains its interest in truth; if the Church is still 
the repository of the testimony of Jesus and the divinely 
accredited authority for works of righteousness ; if the 
ministers of the gospel are yet responsible for the " faith 
once delivered unto the saints/' for the purity of the 
gospel and the integrity of the kingdom of God on earth, 
and if history is valuable for the lessons it teaches and 
the principles it vindicates, then that truth, that right- 
eousness, that faith, that history, all demand the record 
here made, the lessons taught and the principles vindi- 
cated in the trials and sufferings of God's annointed ser- 
vants during the recent reign of terror. 

The following shocking narrative of murder must, 
according to the decision of the publisher, close the 
first volume. 

Eev. Thomas Glanville and Son. 

The subject of this sketch was long and favorably 
known to the Church in Missouri, and was highly 
esteemed for his integrity, honesty and fidelity to prin- 
ciple as well as for his general usefulness as a minister. 

Others who knew him better have furnished the fol- 
lowing account of his life and labors, together with the 
circumstantial details of the dark and bloody tragedy 
which closed his career of usefulness on earth — one of 
the most heartless and cruel assassinations in all the 
dark history of martyrdom in Missouri. 

The following sketch has been furnished by an inti- 
mate friend of the martyred minister, and will be read 
with mournful interest : 

"Bev. Thomas Glanville and Son. — It was the privilege 
of the writer to be intimately acquainted with the sub- 


jects of this sketch for more than a score of years. 
"Without reference to official documents or private pa- 
pers, I write mostly from memory, hoping thereby to 
preserve the precious memory of two worthy men. 

"Rev. Thomas Glanville was born in England about 
A. D. 1811, and came to America when about sixteen 
years of age. He was converted to God in early life, 
and after much mental agony yielded to the conviction 
that it was his duty to preach. 

"Soon after he began to preach, he joined the St. 
Louis Conference M. E. Church, South, and traveled 
several years. But family afflictions came upon him — 
his wife died and left him three children . He married 
again and soon afterward located. 

"Time rolled on and ever found him diligent in busi- 
ness, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord; and laboring 
efficiently as a local preacher. 

"In the fall of 1852 a camp-meeting was held in his 
neigborhood by the lamented Leeper, Anthony and 
Bond. Bro. Glanville's three children were at the altar 
as penitents. All the tenderest sympathies of a father's 
heart went out after them. How pointed his instructions! 
and his prayers ! O, how fervent ! 

"He told the writer that he had made a vow that if 
the Lord would accept his three children at that meet- 
ing, he would rejoin the Conference and travel and 
preach as long as his way seemed open. The Lord did 
mercifully accept his three children ; and, true to his 
vow, he rejoined the Conference and remained an ac- 
ceptable member till the da}- of his death. 

" When the late civil war commenced and the flock 
in Southwest Missouri was left for the most part with- 


out a shepherd, he and the local preachers of his neigh- 
borhood met in council and went out 'two and two' 
and held meetings in the most destitute neighborhoods. 

" After a time he was ordered by a militia Captain to 
discontinue his preaching. This grieved him much, but 
he yielded and remained silent for almost a year. 

11 In February, 1863, a meeting was appointed in one 
of those destitute neighborhoods, which he attended. 
The ( fire was shut up in his bones/ and in company 
with a friend he waited on the Captain then in com- 
mand in that vicinity and requested permission to 
resume his duties as a minister. To his great joy he 
received a written permission, and the next night he 
preached a sermon full of joy and comfort. 

"In July or August following three men called at 
his gate one dark night and ordered him to leave the 
country on pain of death. A few days after he remarked 
to the writer that he would love to live to see peace re- 
stored to the countiy, and he hoped he would, and then 
added, ' Those fellows may kill me, but I think not. Of 
one thing I am certain, they can't harm me ; death has 
no terrors for me, and has not had for fifteen years.' 

"He was a bold and fearless man. ''Conscious inno- 
cence knows no fear;' but through the entreaties of 
friends he left home for a month or more; and it is to 
be regretted that he made up his mind to return, and 
did so, saying that he would 'risk the consequences/ 

" He published an appointment for preaching, and a 
few hours before the time came, two militia soldiers 
waited on him and informed him that he would not be 
permitted to hold the service. He remained at home 
that Sabbath, and remarked to a neighbor, ' Those fel- 


lows will kill me, I believe; but they shall never have 
it to say that the}^ shot me in the back.' That holy 
Sabbath was his last on earth. 

" When night came on and good men laid them down 
to peaceful slumbers, his murderers approached his 
quiet dwelling. A ball discharged from a revolver 
passed through his window, entered his face and he fell 
to the floor. To make sure of his victim the murderer 
raised the window and reaching in shot him through 
the chest. They then went round, forced the door and 
three men entered. After a few words with Bro. Glan- 
ville's son, one of them remarked that he had better 
finish the old man, and so saying shot him again. Thus 
died the Rev. Thomas Glanville, in the fifty-third year 
of his age. 

"After threatening to burn the house and ordering 
the family to leave on short time, they rode two miles 
to the residence of Bro. Glanville's eldest son, Mr. A. 
C. Glanville, a man of fine mind and respectable literary 
attainments, with a meek and quiet spirit, and a mem- 
ber of the M. E. Church, South. They called him up, 
and, all unconscious of his father's fate and his own 
danger, he made a light. ]S"o sooner was the light made 
than a ball passed through his window, entered his head 
and he fell lifeless on the hearth. Thus perished father 
and son in one night. 

" Since their death little has been said in reference to 
them ; but they still live in the hearts of many friends, 
and it is well known that they bore the highest type of 

"Bro. Glanville had for many years been an ordained 
elder in the M. E. Church, South, and while as a preacher 


he was neither profound nor brilliant, yet he possessed 
a sonnd mind, a good understanding in the things of 
God, was a good sermonizer and improved every year, 
so that his last days were his best. Peace to his memory. 

"John H. Boss." 

The Eev. John Monroe, of the St. Louis Conference, 
one of the oldest ministers in Missouri, furnishes the 
following sketch of the lamented G-lanville : 

" The Eev. Thomas Glanville was born in England, 
May 15, A. D. 1811. Came to this country about the 
year 1829 or 1830, and a short time afterward was mar- 
ried to Miss Donnell, of Green county, Mo. "Not long 
after this event he embraced religion and united with 
the M. E. Church, and in 1841 was received on trial in 
the Missouri Conference. 

" In 1843 he was appointed to Buffalo Circuit, where 
he endured much affliction, both of body and mind. 
His wife died and he married again, and the next year 
he located. For a time he traveled under the Presiding 
Elder and was readmitted into the St. Louis Conference 
in 1855, and then traveled regularly until the war came 
up. He did not cease to preach in his neighborhood. 
He had an appointment the day he met his awful fate, 
but dared not attend it, as his avowed enemies were 
watching his movements. This was Sabbath, Sept. 20, 
1863. At night three outlaws, guided, no doubt, by an- 
other who was not responsible to any military organiza- 
tion, approached his peaceful home and shot him. And 
what for ? No one knows. He, like all good men, was 
self-denying and made no compromise with sin, wicked 
men or devils; reproving sin in all its forms and in all 

places, he had enemies who threatened him years before,. 



and this was a good time to put their designs into exe- 

"At first he was ordered from home; he went, re- 
mained some three weeks and returned. Then they 
compelled him to take an oath and give bond, in which 
he was bound to stay at home — just what he wanted to 
do. But in a few days after giving bond there came a 
stripling of a boy, purporting to have orders from a 
Lieutenant of the same family whence all his troubles 
came, ordering him to again leave home forthwith, 
and be quick about it. He then, as a law-abiding man, 
went to Captain Allen, then at Hermitage, for protec- 
tion to enable him to keep his obligation, and to know 
how to act under the circumstances. But the Captain 
refused to protect or instruct him, only to tell him that 
he had better leave quickly, knowing at the same time 
that such a course would forfeit his bond. He had 
made up his mind to leave the next morning, but, as 
stated, three armed men came after dark and shot him 
some three or four times, and he expired instantly. His 
last and dying words were, ' Lord, have mercy on my 

" He was buried without a song ; not even a prayer 
was permitted to be offered in behalf of his disconsolate 
wife and weeping children. But the good man ex- 
changed a world of woe forti land of rest. 

" Thomas Glanville was always known to be a law- 
abiding man and a peaceable citizen. He often boasted 
of the privileges he enjoyed under this benign Govern- 
ment, and only claimed his rights under its Constitution 
and laws. He was never known to violate any law, 
abhorred a mean thing and would speak out against it. 


He strenuously opposed all bushwhacking, stealing, 
murder, and any and all infringement upon the rights of 
others. He stood up squarely for the rights of the M. 
E. Church, South, and contended boldly for the princi- 
ples of religious liberty. In view of these things it is 
not difficult to account for his shameful and brutal 
murder. John Monroe." 

It is quite a relief to turn away, for a time at least, 
from the contemplation of such scenes of barbarity and 
more than savage cruelty as the history of the terrible 
past presents to our faith and philosophy. 

Three long chapters, prepared for this volume, are 
laid over for the second, by the decree of the publisher, 
to prevent the enlargement of the present volume to an 
improper size. By it the next volume will be enriched 
beyond measure. What is lost to this will be gained 
for that, and neither the work, as a whole, nor the 
reader will be damaged. 

The deferred chapters contain an account Of the 
"Rosecrans oath," in " Special Order No. 61/' of March 
7th, 1864, and its designs upon the common laws and 
facts of religious liberty ; the persecutions, trials, ban- 
ishment, etc., of the Rev. Drs. McPheeters and Farris, 
of the Presbyterian Church, the Rev. Tyson Dynes, of 
the M. E. Church, South, the long imprisonment and 
peculiar sufferings of the Rev. Dr. McAnally ; the effort 
to crush or confiscate the publishing house at St. Louis, 
and its preservation and security by the agent, the Rev. 
P. M. Pinckard ; and a " Chapter of Martyrs," detailing 
with careful minuteness the cold-blooded murder of the 
Rev. John L. Wood, the Rev. George L. Sexton and 
the Rev. Edwin Robinson. 


The history of the indictments, trials, imprisonment 
and persecutions of ministers under the "test oath" 
of the New Constitution will form a prominent and ex- 
tensive feature of the second volume, with due attention 
to the particulars of the murder of the Rev. Samuel S. 
Headlee and others, which will invest the work with 
thrilling interest. The future historian will assign to 
these names a conspicuous place upon the long roll of 
martyrs, and the future Church will reap a rich harvest 
of souls, with multiplied agencies and resources, from 
the blood they shed " for the testimony of Jesus and 
the word of God/' 

" They lived unknown 
Till persecution dragged them into fame, 
And chased them up to heaven. Their ashes flew, 
No marble tells us whither. With their names 
No bard embalms and sanctifies his song : 
And history, so warm on meaner themes, 
Is cold on this. She execrates, indeed, 
The tyranny that doomed them to the fire, 
But gives the glorious sufferers little praise.' 

End of Volume I. 



This book is 

under no circumstances to be 
en from the Building 

tLfl/ r P 

NIAr, ^ 

form 410 

\ i^i